StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
75 messages Options
StreetComplete 10 / foot=yes on residential – Hi, i am seeing a growing number of changesets setting foot=yes on all kinds of roads e.g. residential https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/40...
Alright, I will change it so that the question whether a road is accessible for pedestrians is never asked for residential roads (and living stree...
Am 14.02.2019 um 20:50 schrieb Tobias Zwick: > Alright, I will change it so that the question whether a road is > accessible for pedestrians...
No, I didn't. I explained the quest here: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-February/042860.html In a nutshell: foot=yes/no ...
I am sorry, this is not the correct approach. We have here plenty of streets in other categories (unclassified|teritery|secondary|primary) witho...
The question asked is "Is this street accessible for pedestrians here?". It doesn't ask for the user's opinion on how safe it is. Also:...
> The question asked is "Is this street accessible for pedestrians here?". > It doesn't ask for the user's opinion on how safe it...
Is this now about the word "legal" or about the negation of the question? What difference does the latter make? Also, doesn't "prob...
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 7:26 PM Tobias Zwick <osm@...> wrote: > > Is this now about the word "legal" or about the negation o...
Okay, right, this is a good point. I am not a native speaker and translated the German word "zugänglich" (literally: enterable) to Engli...
Am 15.02.2019 um 12:35 schrieb Tobias Zwick: > So, while a tag to denote that a road is rural does not exist (yet), I could filter out unintere...
Why do you exclude tracks? Legal access to them are often denied as they're on private land (example: farms) Why ford? Why oneway? Cheers DaveF...
Places where you are "not allowed to walk*" vary hugely from one country to another - in some places the presumption is yes unless denie...
Am 17.02.2019 um 20:44 schrieb Andy Townsend: > I don't think that a "global" encouragement to add foot=no makes sense; there'll be l...
As already stated, sidewalk is to indicate a physical object. Sidewalk has no legal implications. 'Foot' is used purely to indicate legality. On...
I'm afraid countries differ with respect to legal imlications of sidewalk. This discussion, I've seen it 5 times now ande it never ends with con...
True. Primarily because there's a false conflation of meanings, such as yours. That there are laws in certain countries around the world is ir...
Different tagging will not remove the non-consensus. Non-conflation is unrealistic. (wow, 5 negs in a row, respect!) Mvg Peter Elderson >...
On 18/02/2019 08:33, Peter Elderson wrote: > Different tagging will not remove the non-consensus. What consensus will it remove? Misunders...
On 2019-02-18 15:58, Dave F via Tagging wrote: >> Different tagging will not remove the non-consensus. > > What consensus will it ...
Am 18.02.2019 um 00:48 schrieb Dave F via Tagging: > As already stated, sidewalk is to indicate a physical object. Sidewalk > has no legal ...
As stated previously the sidewalk tag has no legal implication. The question within the app needs amending to clarify that's it's the legality o...
Tracks are often "access=private" for everyone, so there's no reason to call out foot access in particular. -- Mark On Sun, 17 Feb 2...
I should have been clearer. I was indicating a case where foot=no would be appropriate, but I should have stated there are also cases where 'yes...
Am 17.02.2019 um 21:57 schrieb Dave F via Tagging: > I should have been clearer. I was indicating a case where foot=no > would be appropria...
Le 15.02.19 à 12:35, Tobias Zwick a écrit : > - perhaps also only ask for a sidewalk in the first place if the road is tagged as lit=yes? Aski...
sent from a phone > On 15. Feb 2019, at 01:24, Tobias Zwick <osm@...> wrote: > > Is this now about the word "legal" o...
Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenberg@...> writes: >> The question asked is "Is this street accessible for pedestrians here?"....
+1! On 2019-02-15 00:52, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > I believe this is the wrong question. It should be “Are pedestrians legally prohibited f...
Am 14.02.2019 um 22:10 schrieb Volker Schmidt: > I am sorry, this is not the correct approach. We have here plenty of > streets in other ...
> Agreed. I don't see much of a difference between residential and higher > class roads. I would even argue that around here a sidewalk=no +...
Am 14.02.2019 um 23:32 schrieb Tobias Zwick: >> Agreed. I don't see much of a difference between residential and higher >> class roads...
Tobias Wrede <list@...> writes: > Think of all the residential roads in cities that get a higher class > tagging because of their fun...
On 14/02/2019 19:51, Tobias Zwick wrote: > This is, by the way, a bit of a different topic now, because the > thread was originally about ...
Am 15.02.2019 um 11:54 schrieb Rory McCann: > On 14/02/2019 19:51, Tobias Zwick wrote: > > > Let's be pragmatic: We don't tag things j...
On 15/02/2019 12:20, Tobias Wrede wrote: > Unfortunately, the legal situation is not always as clear as we wish > to. There are a lot of ...
>> Pedestrians can take the level footpaths/sidewalks instead taking the >> underpass: >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/6187...
sent from a phone > On 17. Feb 2019, at 22:39, Tobias Zwick <osm@...> wrote: > > No, that tag is correct. It is not allowed to ...
Because this is about foot=no, not handcart=no On February 17, 2019 11:23:46 PM GMT+01:00, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist@...> wrote: &g...
Hi Tobias, why not use foot=use_sidepath and/or sidewalk=no? In combination with hw=primary/secondary, routers should be able to work out tha...
Am 15.02.2019 um 17:09 schrieb Hubert87: > > why not use foot=use_sidepath and/or sidewalk=no? In combination with > hw=primary/secon...
sent from a phone > On 17. Feb 2019, at 23:35, Tobias Wrede <list@...> wrote: > > We also need to apply common sense when mappi...
>> We also need to apply common sense when mapping. > > >yes. Although common sense is not a criterion for legal access. T...
sent from a phone > On 15. Feb 2019, at 13:20, Tobias Wrede <list@...> wrote: > > By German law you are required to use f...
Am 17.02.2019 um 17:45 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > this is oversimplified, you are indeed legally required to walk on the > road even in...
sent from a phone > On 17. Feb 2019, at 23:49, Tobias Wrede <list@...> wrote: > > Exactly, but how should the router know that?...
On Sun, 17 Feb 2019 at 18:07, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist@...> wrote: > highway=* > tunnel=yes > sidewalk=no > and a signi...
sent from a phone On 17. Feb 2019, at 23:49, Tobias Wrede <list@...> wrote: >> this is oversimplified, you are indeed legally requ...
On Fri, 15 Feb 2019, 13:22 Tobias Wrede <list@... wrote: > Unfortunately, the legal situation is not always as clear as we wish to. >...
Yes, there is a new quest in v10, which tags foot=yes/no. It is no problem to make changes on it, but let me first provide some information on it ...
>The rationale behind collecting this information is, that if a street >is >explicitly surveyed as having no sidewalk, it is no longer ...
This is, by the way, a bit of a different topic now, because the thread was originally about tagging foot=yes on residential, not whether foot=yes...
sent from a phone > On 14. Feb 2019, at 19:51, Tobias Zwick <osm@...> wrote: > > The reason for it being (not) accessible is se...
sent from a phone > On 14. Feb 2019, at 19:51, Tobias Zwick <osm@...> wrote: > > I am sure the police would find something >...
sent from a phone > On 14. Feb 2019, at 19:51, Tobias Zwick <osm@...> wrote: > > I doubt access restrictions are used that way ...
Am 14.02.2019 um 19:51 schrieb Tobias Zwick: > This is, by the way, a bit of a different topic now, because the thread > was originally abou...
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 3:13 PM Tobias Wrede <list@...> wrote: > Still, they are the very minority of situations where a residential (or ...
Am 14.02.2019 um 21:28 schrieb Kevin Kenny: > On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 3:13 PM Tobias Wrede <list@...> wrote: >> Still, they are the...
On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 at 13:51, Tobias Zwick <osm@...> wrote: > I doubt access restrictions are used that way in reality. > The absence ...
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019, 11:17 JS <grimpeur78@... wrote: > The legal situation is already represented by the default OSM setting, > cons...
With this information given, the question is, whether highway=residential + sidewalk=no implies a foot=yes . And with implies, I mean, tha...
Legally and practically, all roads are open to pedestrians unless there is a specific prohibition. Walking is considered a basic right, and prac...
On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 at 08:42, Tobias Zwick <osm@...> wrote: > What do you think? Hello, In my experience in Canada I would indeed expec...
I can't find any issue on Github for this feature. But in Ireland (& I think UK), all public roads except motorways, are foot=yes. Legally y...
In the United States, the rules aren't quite as permissive (for example, authorities are allowed to forbid foot traffic), but in practice, I'm no...
sent from a phone > On 14. Feb 2019, at 16:05, Rory McCann <rory@...> wrote: > > But in Ireland (& I think UK), all public ...
I agree that it would make sense to not ask whether a road has a sidewalk outside of built-up areas because in most cases, it will have no sidewal...
On 14 February 2019 15:05:56 GMT, Rory McCann <rory@...> wrote: >I can't find any issue on Github for this feature. > >But in Ire...
apart from underpasses, bridges also intersections and similar constructs. They need not be trunk/motorroad. For example many road segments at De...
sent from a phone > On 14. Feb 2019, at 10:26, Florian Lohoff <f@...> wrote: > > All residentials are accessible to pedestrians...
I think that apps adding redundant tags to cover for a tiny number of special cases is going to cause more problems than it solves (i.e. users mis...
I don't take dismissive and generalizing statements on a project I have been putting 3+ years of lifeblood into, invest much of my free time in an...
... and just to make this even trickier: The access tag is (in most cases) about legal access, and not about is-it-a-good-idea-to-route-a-pedest...
Wrong thread? Anyway, the quest in StreetComplete only asks for foot=yes/no if the road is tagged with sidewalk=no. On 14/02/2019 15:44, Volker ...
On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 04:00:24PM +0100, Tobias Zwick wrote: > Wrong thread? > > Anyway, the quest in StreetComplete only asks for f...