Changeset: 118232883
corrected designations
Closed by ianc
Tags
changesets_count | 5429 |
---|---|
created_by | iD 2.20.4 |
host | https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit |
imagery_used | Mapbox Satellite |
locale | en-GB |
warnings:almost_junction:highway-highway | 1 |
Discussion
-
Comment from LordGarySugar
Hi, is there a reason you have deleted pedestrian crossings and retagged pavements and footpaths as highway=path?
-
Comment from ianc
Yeah, that's not the right way to do crossing - that should be on the node. Footway is for public rights of way. It was impossible to pull out rights of way since Designation hardly ever gets filled in (although I have fixed a lot of that now).
-
Comment from LordGarySugar
I strongly disagree. The OSM Wiki clearly suggests tagging the crossing as a way as well (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Crossings) and pavements should be tagged highway=footway + footway=sidewalk (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dfootway); as is the broad consensus of the community. There is no justification behind deleting crossings which breaks pedestrian routing at junctions or changing footways to paths which introduces ambiguity over the intended users of the pavement (a path suggests a multi-use way open to bicycles where a footway does not)
-
Comment from ianc
Well somebody needs to update the interface and its guides, since footway has foot=designated as an assumed value just as bridleway has horse=designated. All I know is that it was all but impossible to extract usable rights of way data that wasn't riddled with errors, so I fixed them in the clearest and most consistent way I could that was also consistent with the instructions in the editor.
I can see a case for including a way where there is a clearly separated refuge crossed by a longer path, but none whatsoever where there is no other path or footway.
But what do I know. I just found a whole load of villages hamlets in the heart of England that nobody had ever bothered mapping. I'm beginning to remember why. -
Comment from LordGarySugar
Public rights of ways have a specific tag 'prow_ref' and designation=* for a reason, to be able to differentiate public footpaths from pavements and other general footpaths. These can then be easily extracted into useful data by excluding highway=footway without these tags, for example in this overpass turbo query (https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gSJ) which only shows highway=footway with a prow_ref tag. All you would need to do to clear up these 'errors' would be to simply add designation=public_footpath and prow_ref=* and leave everything else untouched. Also, deleting things because you in particular don't see a case for it is uncalled for and extremely selfish.
If you ever need advice on how to solve a problem you have with using OSM data, feel free to ask, as arguments like these could have been easily avoided if you simply asked for advice before going around changing thousands of footways.
-
Comment from ianc
What do you think I have been trying to do? I couldn't get clean data. So cleaned it.
But anyway, you are mistaken. The Wiki gives your method as an *alternative* and clearly states that other methods are not deprecated (sidenote: St A is the only place I have seen this method, but I don't map areas I'm not familar with). Also, path+sidewalk renders perfectly well and is much easier to distinguish from the PRoWs when styling downloaded data that has been neglected for years.
Given that a big fat chunk of St Albans and district is mapped only because I spent weeks doing it in the early days (and recently corrected one of my own 9-year-old errors), and the area I am now is only not 5 years out of date because I do it, we'll have a little less of the of the patronising twattery please.
-
Comment from SomeoneElse
Er, I don't think that an attempt to explain really comes under the heading of "patronising twattery". I get that you don't like being told that you're wrong, but that's no reason to fling insults around.
-
Comment from SomeoneElse
The reason why highway=path is less used in England and Wales is partly historical and partly that an access tag is needed here to distiguish foot=yes from =permissive etc.
highway=path can't have both foot=designated (saying it is really a footpath not a cycleway) and foot=permissive or =yes (for the legal access rights).
This isn't a problem where there are sensible access rules like Sweden or Scotland, but it is in England and Wales. -
Comment from ianc
I realise that people who think they own the project don't often react well when they get pushback against their recipe for confusion, but that is the perennial problem with open source projects, and the reason so many editors have just walked away. The number of areas that are badly undermapped or just years out of date speaks to the crisis in editor numbers that has been noted in the press. This sort of nonsense is why.
I found a load of wildly inaccurate and incomplete information in an area where I have deep roots. I fixed it, taking guidance from the system, in a consistent way that made sense, but not going outside areas I am not familiar with. In my own time, like everyone else. So if you are going to patronise, do not be surprised at the reaction.
-
Comment from SomeoneElse
> I fixed it
I don't think that you did. Deleting some crossings in the centre of Wheathampstead suggests https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_foot&route=51.81562%2C-0.29308%3B51.81537%2C-0.29267 as a preferred route by foot, rather than via https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8963157060 .
Ways (1-20 of 32)
- 1
- 2
- 1038234327, v1
- 23174080, v5
- 23174215, v5
- 23174216, v13
- 23174695, v7
- 23568299, v4
- 23568300, v8
- 23572352, v5
- 232899703, v3
- 500253658, v2
- 1021475361, v2
- 1021475363, v4
- 1021475364, v4
- 1021475366, v4
- 1025971656, v3
- 1025971657, v3
- 1025981746, v2
- 1026230319, v2
- 1027056157, v2
- 1027056159, v2
Nodes (5)
Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
OpenStreetMap is a map of the world, created by people like you and free to use under an open license.
Hosting is supported by Fastly, OSMF corporate members, and other partners.
https://openstreetmap.org/copyright | https://openstreetmap.org |
Copyright OpenStreetMap and contributors, under an open license |