Adding separate footways needs a lot of care to not break things. I did a quick check in Bern and couldn't find any larger deletions of footways, so we need to wait till Andreas gives us a pointer.

I did see a rather large amount of "original" mapping and tagging that would be a good idea to avoid by everybody contributing in Bern given that it is a high density and important area.

Simon

Am 24.08.2017 um 19:27 schrieb marc marc:

Hello,

It is not me :-) But as talk a few weeks on talk mailing list, create a separate walkway when in fact it is actually connected to the road breaks the routing. A routing suggests that you can always cross the road when in reality it is not always true (barrier, hedge, ...). Another assumes that you can never cross if there is no path between the barrier and the road. For now, IMHO the best solution is to add the tag sidewalk to the road when the counter is against the road. The kerb tag is then useful for people with reduced mobility. The geographic precision is less but in any case the gps regularly have an imprecision as great as the width of the road. There is a proposal to improve routing for separate trotters but it is not completed and no routing to my knowledge uses it

PS: Look for the example described on talk, you will see funny results.

Regards, Marc

Le 24. 08. 17 à 19:07, Andreas Bürki a écrit :

...

Hello

Have noticed, there is a "sidewalk cleaner" under way doing some nasty work in Berne.

Please Mr. Cleaner, don't do that. There is a reason for sidewalks mapped beside of the street: Visual impaired people, so called blind people.

In a long run, highway:footway and highway:footway + footway:sidewalk will serve as basis for a map for visual impaired people.

Thx for your cooperation and understanding.

cheeers, h.

---

talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch

The station has some indoor mapping (which uses lvel not layer) which may however currently be severly broken, see http://openlevelup.net/?l=0#19/46.94886/7.43989 and  http://projets.pavie.info/id-indoor/#background=Bing&level=2&map=21....

Simon

Am 24.08.2017 um 20:25 schrieb amilopowers@u-cloud.ch:

I am sorry to use this topic for this. But am I wrong or are layers/levels in the train station "Bern" pretty messed up? I think someone thought layers from the rail level up and others the other way around.

I think there's a lot of craft mapping needed to fix this.

Gesendet von ProtonMail mobile

-------- Original-Nachricht -------- An 24. Aug. 2017, 20:21, Simon Poole schrieb:

Adding separate footways needs a lot of care to not break things.
I did
a quick check in Bern and couldn't find any larger deletions of
footways, so we need to wait till Andreas gives us a pointer.

I did see a rather large amount of "original" mapping and tagging
that
would be a good idea to avoid by everybody contributing in Bern given
that it is a high density and important area.

Simon


Am 24.08.2017 um 19:27 schrieb marc marc:
> Hello,
>
> It is not me :-)
> But as talk a few weeks on talk mailing list, create a separate
walkway
> when in fact it is actually connected to the road breaks the
routing.
> A routing suggests that you can always cross the road when in
reality it
> is not always true (barrier, hedge, ...).
> Another assumes that you can never cross if there is no path
between the
> barrier and the road.
> For now, IMHO the best solution is to add the tag sidewalk to
the road
> when the counter is against the road. The kerb tag is then
useful for
> people with reduced mobility. The geographic precision is less
but in
> any case the gps regularly have an imprecision as great as the
width of
> the road.
> There is a proposal to improve routing for separate trotters but
it is
> not completed and no routing to my knowledge uses it
>
> PS: Look for the example described on talk, you will see funny
results.
>
> Regards,
> Marc
>
> Le 24. 08. 17 à 19:07, Andreas Bürki a écrit :
>> Hello
>>
>> Have noticed, there is a "sidewalk cleaner" under way doing
some nasty
>> work in Berne.
>>
>> Please Mr. Cleaner, don't do that. There is a reason for sidewalks
>> mapped beside of the street: Visual impaired people, so called
blind people.
>>
>> In a long run, highway:footway and highway:footway +
footway:sidewalk
>> will serve as basis for a map for visual impaired people.
>>
>> Thx for your cooperation and understanding.
>>
>>
>> cheeers, h.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> talk-ch mailing list
> talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch
> http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch


_______________________________________________
talk-ch mailing list
talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch
http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch


_______________________________________________
talk-ch mailing list
talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch
http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch

Am 24.08.2017 um 21:07 schrieb Simon Poole:

And for completeness sake: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_Indoor_Tagging

Am 24.08.2017 um 20:56 schrieb Simon Poole:

...

http://openlevelup.net/?l=0#19/46.94886/7.43989 and http://projets.pavie.info/id-indoor/#background=Bing&level=2&map=21....

This indoor stuff could be an issue for DINAcon hacknight. ;-)

cheers, h.

---

talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch

Am 24.08.2017 um 19:27 schrieb marc marc:

Hello,

It is not me :-)

Lucky you. ;-)

But as talk a few weeks on talk mailing list, create a separate walkway when in fact it is actually connected to the road breaks the routing. A routing suggests that you can always cross the road when in reality it is not always true (barrier, hedge, ...). Another assumes that you can never cross if there is no path between the barrier and the road. For now, IMHO the best solution is to add the tag sidewalk to the road when the counter is against the road. The kerb tag is then useful for people with reduced mobility. The geographic precision is less but in any case the gps regularly have an imprecision as great as the width of the road.

Hmmm... not sure about that. IMHO the prob with tag sidewalk added to highway is, the the width of the street. How a gps will know it?

Personally I prefer separate mapping of sidewalks. And of course, you have to do that carefully in order not to break other mapping/routing.

There is a proposal to improve routing for separate trotters but it is not completed and no routing to my knowledge uses it

PS: Look for the example described on talk, you will see funny results.

Any link?

cheeers, h.

Regards, Marc

Le 24. 08. 17 à 19:07, Andreas Bürki a écrit :

...

Hello

Have noticed, there is a "sidewalk cleaner" under way doing some nasty work in Berne.

Please Mr. Cleaner, don't do that. There is a reason for sidewalks mapped beside of the street: Visual impaired people, so called blind people.

In a long run, highway:footway and highway:footway + footway:sidewalk will serve as basis for a map for visual impaired people.

Thx for your cooperation and understanding.

cheeers, h.

---

talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch

Am 24.08.2017 um 21:19 schrieb Marc Gemis:

...

...

PS: Look for the example described on talk, you will see funny results.

Any link?

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2017-July/032778.html

Thx. Read.

I'm not pretty sure, if this is a "OSM problem", as we can only map, what we see and add given tags. - Or, how other maps solve the issue?

Maybe the routing software has to become smarter...

cheeers, h.

regards

m _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch

Am 24.08.2017 um 21:56 schrieb Marc Gemis:

...

I'm not pretty sure, if this is a "OSM problem", as we can only map, what we see and add given tags. - Or, how other maps solve the issue?

Maybe the routing software has to become smarter...

to quote imagico (http://blog.imagico.de/social-engineering-in-openstreetmap/)

"So if – as a mapper – you want to really support and encourage competent data use better ignore any assumed interests of data users and map as you as a mapper can most efficiently represent your observations on the ground in data form."

this might very well apply in this situation, so when you can better tag a sidewalk with a separate line, why not ?

Ehm, maybe I didn't understand you correctly, but this is exactly what I always tried to do:

Separate sidewalk with minimum tagging like this:

highway=footway footway=sidewalk

or for crosswalk (pedestrian/zebra crossing)

highway=footway footway=crossing

and if I don't forget I add the surfeace, e.g. surface:asphalt

And I do this as well for bridges, see Nydeggbrücke or Kirchenfeldbrücke

cheeers, h.

m. _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch

Le 24. 08. 17 à 21:56, Marc Gemis a écrit :

when you can better tag a sidewalk with a separate line, why not ?

If a see a sidewalk and a street (2 way separated from each other with a space between both), I tag them as such.

if I see a street with 2 lanes, I tag one way, lane is a characteristic of the path like its surface or its width.

I see one way with a lane for car and sidewalk for pedestrian, I tag one way highway=residential + sidewalk=both

No one agrees to divide a two-lanes road into two ways because it breaks the routing despite geographic precision would be better. I don't understand why we sometimes do the opposite with sidewalk.

Blind user have no problem to find the limit between a raised sidewalk and a street. Create a disconnected sidewalk where it is not the case has a low utility due to the fact that a gps have a low accuracy. But break the routing could make a blind user to cross where you can't. In the example of the list talk, depending on the algorithm used, the user had the choice to cross anywhere without knowing whether it is possible or not or walk 100m and walk on the street next to the artificially disconnected sidewalk. The 2 are worse than 5m inaccuracy.

Therefore we must do things in a good order : 1) have a tag or relation with a meaning "This sidewalk is separated for geographical precision, but for routing, it is permanently connected to the road". 2) Have at least one routing algorithm that can use it. 3) It is only afterwards that one can draw the sidewalks separately without sending the people into a dangerous situation.

I support these arguments.

Am 25.08.2017 um 00:08 schrieb Raphael Das Gupta (das-g):

marc bring up good and valid points.

On 24.08.2017 23:12, marc marc wrote:

...

3. It is only afterwards that one can draw the sidewalks separately

without sending the people into a dangerous situation.

In what I assumed up today to be the consensus, there are two cases when sidewalks should already now be drawn separately:

1. (as already mentioned) when separated from the street by space (i.e., not actually laterally connected to the street)
2. when separated from the street by a barrier (e.g. as seen here https://www.openstreetcam.org/details/8505/3981 on the right-hand side)

In all other cases, for the time being, the presence (or absence) of sidewalks should indeed be represented by additional tags on the street's way rather than dedicated ways for the sidewalks, and I'm not even sure whether we should pursue

...

1. have a tag or relation with a meaning "This sidewalk is separated for geographical precision, but for routing, it is permanently connected

to the road". 2) Have at least one routing algorithm that can use it.

as that would complicate things further for both mappers and data users. (I do agree though, that if we /were/ to map all sidewalks separately, whether separated or not, these steps would have to be taken first.)

Maps (and map data) must abstract (and therefore, to some degree, simplify, aggregate and interpret) reality. It must do so, not (or at least not primarily) as a means to save data size and mapping effort, but to be adequately useful at all. Taking it to the extreme, to make that point obvious: The information "there is, here on this street, a rectangular yellow paint application on the ground, and next to it another one and another one and several more"* is much less useful than the information "here on this street, there's a marked pedestrian crossing".

For sidewalks this might be less obvious, but there's an important semantic difference between "there are a street and a sidewalk next to each other, with unknown lateral relation to each other" and "there's a street with a sidewalk at the right-hand side", because in the latter case, you can (even though you might not be allowed to) walk from the sidewalk onto the street or (even though you might not be allowed to) park a car on the sideway or let someone unboard the car right onto the sidewalk or let them board the car right from the sidewalk. Or you might inadvertently trip and step onto the street. When they are physically separated by space or a barrier, this isn't usually possible and thus this warrants mapping the lateral adjacent and the physically separated case so differently.

Given tools and maps that know about and use this convention to interpret the data (and given data that actually sticks to the convention) this will help blind or otherwise visually impaired people just as much (or even more) than fully seeing-capable ones.

Regards, Raphael

*remember the cantonal GIS that had street ground markings mapped with the actual outlines of the colored area (i.e., dashed lines as series of rectangles, arrows as 9-or-more-vertice polygons, "STOP" markings as vectorization of the actual letters "S", "T", "O" and "P", etc.) instead of their semantics in traffic? While very accurate, that probably isn't useful, unless the road traffic department had planned to renew those markings with a street-wide inkjet printer vehicle or something.

---

talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch

Le 25. 08. 17 à 10:51, Simon Poole a écrit :

there will be parking lots

After using lane and/or width, if we want to improve, when a road has the sidewalk and parking tags, it would probably be necessary to have a tag to specify if it is road-sidewalk-parking or road-parking-sidewalk.

Hi Simon

On 25.08.2017 10:51, Simon Poole wrote:

Am 25.08.2017 um 00:08 schrieb Raphael Das Gupta (das-g):

...

In what I assumed up today to be the consensus, there are two cases when sidewalks should already now be drawn separately:

1. (as already mentioned) when separated from the street by space (i.e., not actually laterally connected to the street)
2. when separated from the street by a barrier (e.g. as seen here https://www.openstreetcam.org/details/8505/3981 on the right-hand side)

In all other cases, for the time being, the presence (or absence) of sidewalks should indeed be represented by additional tags on the street's way rather than dedicated ways for the sidewalks, and I'm not even sure whether we should pursue

That is fine and dandy, but in reality, particularly in busy central city areas which are likely the most important for pedestrian routing, the case is not so clear cut. You can essentially zoom randomly to any Swiss city and the sidewalks will be at the curb for a couple of meters then there will be parking lots, then a bus stop, street furniture, grass and then perhaps nothing for another piece, all on just one side of a 100m stretch of road. Switching back and forward between mapping schemes on the same "segment" is going to be disastrous from a routing pov.

What is your suggestion or recommendations for these areas, then? Can you give a rule of thumb or a pointer to such an area that in your opinion is mapped well and (mostly) correctly?

Regards, Raphael

On 25.08.2017 08:13, Marc Mongenet wrote:

I don't understand the sidewalk accuracy argument. With street width, the sidewalk location can accurately computed, no?

In theory, yes. In theoretical practice though, this would require that the street width would be tagged accurate at every running meter of the street and errors in that width would add up with errors in the street's position, so drawing the sidewalk separately from, aerial imagery might be more precise. In actual practice, the offsets in aerial imagery and noise/error in GPS positions tend to be much larger than this and the navigation way's topology tend to be much more important than the precise location of the ways.

So yes, if you're worried about sidewalk location, and the sidewalk isn't physically (by space or barrier) separated from the street, do tag street width or at least the number of lanes and make sure the street's way has a reasonable location. Only where the sidewalk is physically separated draw them as separate ways as precise as feasible and make sure you connect them properly to the streets where the separation ends or is broken (gates in barriers, road intersections, pedestrian crosswalks, asphalted gaps in the space between road and sidewalk, ...) so that navigation can work properly.

Unfortunately, the "Sidewalks" article on the wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sidewalks doesn't currently https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Sidewalks&oldid=1501150 mandate that convention, merely hints at it, and I'm not sure whether there's strongly enough consensus to change that document accordingly. (See also this old (2012) discussion https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Sidewalks#Separated_from_the_road_by_some_form_of_barrier.3F on that article's discussion page.)

Regards, Raphael

What about the width of an hedge or grass area between the sidewalk and the road ?

It's also more difficult to map the width of a sidewalk with obstacles if the sidewalk is only tagged on the main road: you get ugly tags such as sidewalk:left:width and have to split the main road each time the sidewalk width on the right or left changes.

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 8:13 AM, Marc Mongenet marc@mongenet.ch wrote:

Hello,

I don't understand the sidewalk accuracy argument. With street width, the sidewalk location can accurately computed, no?

Regards, Marc Mongenet _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch

IMHO sidewalks as footpaths make sense where a roundabout or similar is.

Like here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/47.13245/7.24645

-------- Original-Nachricht -------- An 24. Aug. 2017, 23:12, marc marc schrieb:

Le 24. 08. 17 à 21:56, Marc Gemis a écrit : > when you can better tag a sidewalk with a separate line, why not ? If a see a sidewalk and a street (2 way separated from each other with a space between both), I tag them as such. if I see a street with 2 lanes, I tag one way, lane is a characteristic of the path like its surface or its width. I see one way with a lane for car and sidewalk for pedestrian, I tag one way highway=residential + sidewalk=both No one agrees to divide a two-lanes road into two ways because it breaks the routing despite geographic precision would be better. I don't understand why we sometimes do the opposite with sidewalk. Blind user have no problem to find the limit between a raised sidewalk and a street. Create a disconnected sidewalk where it is not the case has a low utility due to the fact that a gps have a low accuracy. But break the routing could make a blind user to cross where you can't. In the example of the list talk, depending on the algorithm used, the user had the choice to cross anywhere without knowing whether it is possible or not or walk 100m and walk on the street next to the artificially disconnected sidewalk. The 2 are worse than 5m inaccuracy. Therefore we must do things in a good order : 1) have a tag or relation with a meaning "This sidewalk is separated for geographical precision, but for routing, it is permanently connected to the road". 2) Have at least one routing algorithm that can use it. 3) It is only afterwards that one can draw the sidewalks separately without sending the people into a dangerous situation. _______________________________________________ talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch

Simon

Die Changesets habe ich nicht gefunden. Muss ich erst wieder mal in iD einarbeiten.

Was ich sagen kann, dass ich mich erinnere vor Urzeiten Trottoirs im Berner Kirchenfeld Quartier gemappt zu haben. Und einige davon waren jetzt nicht mehr da.

Was noch da war, waren "leere" Nodes in jeweils gleichmässigen Abständen von der Strasse. Soleche leeren Nodes findest du beispielsweise um Justingerweg, Dählhölzliweg, Florastrasse. Und wenn du diese verbindst, erhälst du wieder den Sidewalk.

So habe ich wieder "rekonstruiert", bzw neu gemacht: Luisenstrasse (nur Ostteil), Luisenstrasse (nur Nortteil, rechte Seite), Helvetiastrasse, Aegertenstrasse (nur linke Seite)

HTH

cheeers, h.

Am 24.08.2017 um 19:29 schrieb Simon Poole:

Andreas, bitte ein Entsprechenden Kommentar an den Changeset machen und dann einen Link dazu posten

Danke

Simon.

On 24 August 2017 19:07:07 CEST, "Andreas Bürki" abuerki@anidor.com wrote:

Hello

Have noticed, there is a "sidewalk cleaner" under way doing some nasty
work in Berne.

Please Mr. Cleaner, don't do that. There is a reason for sidewalks
mapped beside of the street: Visual impaired people, so called blind people.

In a long run, highway:footway  and highway:footway + footway:sidewalk
will serve as basis for a map for visual impaired people.

Thx for your cooperation and understanding.


cheeers, h.

-- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit Kaiten Mail gesendet.

---

talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch

Hello Simon

Looks like you have found Mr. Cleaner.

Beside of deleting sidewalks all over the place, the person was as well deleting Essort's Gartenwirtschaft (tagged as usual for Gartenwirtschaft as Biergarten)

Thx, for your efforts.

cheeers, h.

PS In regards to sidewalks, I'll try to do them as I did them here

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51487263#map=17/46.94655/7.45928

Means, sidewalk tagged like:

highway=footway footway=sidewalk barrier=kerb height=0.1

ex. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/288833859

and crossigs or streets crossing the sidewalk tagged accordingly

Most of the sidewalks in Bern can be seen on the Orthofotos of the Bern Vermessungsamt or even better in reality on the spot.

Am 30.08.2017 um 21:23 schrieb Simon Poole:

Ich habe glaub ich den Löscher gefunden https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51556330

Mal schauen ob er sich hier meldet.

Simon

Am 24.08.2017 um 19:07 schrieb Andreas Bürki:

...

Hello

Have noticed, there is a "sidewalk cleaner" under way doing some nasty work in Berne.

Please Mr. Cleaner, don't do that. There is a reason for sidewalks mapped beside of the street: Visual impaired people, so called blind people.

In a long run, highway:footway and highway:footway + footway:sidewalk will serve as basis for a map for visual impaired people.

Thx for your cooperation and understanding.

cheeers, h.

---

talk-ch mailing list talk-ch@openstreetmap.ch http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/mailman/listinfo/talk-ch