Sidewalk vs Footpath?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Sidewalk vs Footpath?

Andrew Harvey-3
Personally I refer to the path next to the road designed for
pedestrians as the footpath, assuming sidewalk is an american term not
really used in Australian English.

So I had set the translation of "sidewalk" in the iD editor for
Australian English to Footpath, however it seems this is causing
confusion and leading to people inadvertently tagging paths not going
along side the road as a sidewalk.

At the moment iD has two presets "Foot path" (highway=footway) and
"Footpath" (highway=footway, footway=sidewalk).

I see now that's just confusing, so I think we should just change this
back to sidewalk as it's probably understood by most Australians and
it's clearer about the distinction between highway=footway and
highway=footway, footway=sidewalk.

Anyone have any thoughts?

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sidewalk vs Footpath?

Joel H.-2
In iD for me at least, paths next to roads are called "Pavement". I
agree with this terminology the most and think it was a mistake for OSM
to adapt the footway=sidewalk tag.

On 20/9/18 8:57 pm, Andrew Harvey wrote:

> Personally I refer to the path next to the road designed for
> pedestrians as the footpath, assuming sidewalk is an american term not
> really used in Australian English.
>
> So I had set the translation of "sidewalk" in the iD editor for
> Australian English to Footpath, however it seems this is causing
> confusion and leading to people inadvertently tagging paths not going
> along side the road as a sidewalk.
>
> At the moment iD has two presets "Foot path" (highway=footway) and
> "Footpath" (highway=footway, footway=sidewalk).
>
> I see now that's just confusing, so I think we should just change this
> back to sidewalk as it's probably understood by most Australians and
> it's clearer about the distinction between highway=footway and
> highway=footway, footway=sidewalk.
>
> Anyone have any thoughts?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sidewalk vs Footpath?

Jonathon Rossi
In iD for me at least, paths next to roads are called "Pavement". I
agree with this terminology the most and think it was a mistake for OSM
to adapt the footway=sidewalk tag.

From my experience "pavement" in the road transport industry commonly refers to the road pavement or road surface, however more broadly the term pavement is any hard surface for any form of traffic.

Personally I refer to the path next to the road designed for
pedestrians as the footpath, assuming sidewalk is an american term not
really used in Australian English.

So I had set the translation of "sidewalk" in the iD editor for
Australian English to Footpath, however it seems this is causing
confusion and leading to people inadvertently tagging paths not going
along side the road as a sidewalk.

At the moment iD has two presets "Foot path" (highway=footway) and
"Footpath" (highway=footway, footway=sidewalk).

I see now that's just confusing, so I think we should just change this
back to sidewalk as it's probably understood by most Australians and
it's clearer about the distinction between highway=footway and
highway=footway, footway=sidewalk.

Anyone have any thoughts?

I agree that us Aussies call both footpaths, iD has always displayed that template as "Sidewalk" for me so must be using en-us, and I agree that it makes sense to differentiate it from the standard "Foot Path" even though Aussie's don't have a different word for them.

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sidewalk vs Footpath?

Graeme Fitzpatrick
In reply to this post by Andrew Harvey-3

On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 at 20:59, Andrew Harvey <[hidden email]> wrote:
Personally I refer to the path next to the road designed for
pedestrians as the footpath, assuming sidewalk is an american term not
really used in Australian English.

I agree entirely!
 
At the moment iD has two presets "Foot path" (highway=footway) and
"Footpath" (highway=footway, footway=sidewalk).

My iD also shows both, with the further info descriptions as Foot path: 

For designated footpaths, i.e. mainly/exclusively for pedestrians. & which then links to highway=footway page

while Footpath:

Sidewalks as separate ways links to footway=sidewalk!

I see now that's just confusing,

Confused? Now why would anyone be confused by that? :-)

Thanks 

Graeme

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sidewalk vs Footpath?

Ian Steer
In reply to this post by Andrew Harvey-3
As much as it irks me to have Americanisms creep into our language (and it irks me a great deal!), I agree with you - sidewalk is more definitive.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 20:57:05 +1000
From: Andrew Harvey <[hidden email]>
To: OSM Australian Talk List <[hidden email]>
Subject: [talk-au] Sidewalk vs Footpath?
Message-ID:
        <[hidden email]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Personally I refer to the path next to the road designed for pedestrians as the footpath, assuming sidewalk is an american term not really used in Australian English.

So I had set the translation of "sidewalk" in the iD editor for Australian English to Footpath, however it seems this is causing confusion and leading to people inadvertently tagging paths not going along side the road as a sidewalk.

At the moment iD has two presets "Foot path" (highway=footway) and "Footpath" (highway=footway, footway=sidewalk).

I see now that's just confusing, so I think we should just change this back to sidewalk as it's probably understood by most Australians and it's clearer about the distinction between highway=footway and highway=footway, footway=sidewalk.

Anyone have any thoughts?



------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au


------------------------------

End of Talk-au Digest, Vol 135, Issue 9
***************************************


_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Sidewalk vs Footpath?

Andrew Harvey-3
> As much as it irks me to have Americanisms creep into our language (and it irks me a great deal!), I agree with you - sidewalk is more definitive.

Here, here. I'll concede, have changed it back to sidewalk.
On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 at 09:21, <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> As much as it irks me to have Americanisms creep into our language (and it irks me a great deal!), I agree with you - sidewalk is more definitive.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 20:57:05 +1000
> From: Andrew Harvey <[hidden email]>
> To: OSM Australian Talk List <[hidden email]>
> Subject: [talk-au] Sidewalk vs Footpath?
> Message-ID:
>         <[hidden email]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Personally I refer to the path next to the road designed for pedestrians as the footpath, assuming sidewalk is an american term not really used in Australian English.
>
> So I had set the translation of "sidewalk" in the iD editor for Australian English to Footpath, however it seems this is causing confusion and leading to people inadvertently tagging paths not going along side the road as a sidewalk.
>
> At the moment iD has two presets "Foot path" (highway=footway) and "Footpath" (highway=footway, footway=sidewalk).
>
> I see now that's just confusing, so I think we should just change this back to sidewalk as it's probably understood by most Australians and it's clearer about the distinction between highway=footway and highway=footway, footway=sidewalk.
>
> Anyone have any thoughts?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Talk-au Digest, Vol 135, Issue 9
> ***************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au