Not suggesting you deleted them. Thanks for the link to osm-deep-history. Very handy and clear.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126807065

That absolutely isn't right. I added the lowered kerbs through the OSM Go Map! to the nodes. Thanks for flagging it up.

osm.wiki/Go_Map!!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126822467

The crossings at intersection on Westend and W96th Street. I added Lowered kerb as they are there.

So from what I understand from reading the documents to barrier=kerb is that it doesn't allow wheelchair access.

"A kerb (or curb) is a short solid barrier, usually found at the edge of a road, path or sidewalk, which prevents entrance by vehicles and wheelchair users. The height of the kerb is tagged additionally as height=*, if available. Right side is bottom, left side is top."

barrier=*

I visited the location just now and there are lowered curbs there. I'll add them to the nodes

Has the DOT removed the lowered kerbs?

Hi,
There are lowered kerbs at that crossing. Please let me know why you changed it to barrier kerbs. Thanks.

Also thanks for the bing map layer suggestion.

Here are some more links for your reference about the drive to create better routing for pedestrians.

https://2018.stateofthemap.us/program/inclusive-pedestrian-mapping-opensidewalks-accessmap-and-accessibility.html

https://tcat.cs.washington.edu/opensidewalks-2/

Whilst the documentation has yet to be formalized, large parts of Seattle, that I can see, is mapped this way because there is a concerted effort to build a pedestrian routing system that is equitable for all. Thus the need for distinction. I am not a part of this group there. However, it is also not "ground truth" to have the pedestrian crossing go all the way up onto the sidewalk, just so that it connects to the sidewalk.
I'm happy to do as you suggest for now. I won't reedit the tags. Ongoing I'll keep editing these antenna as sidewalks.

Thanks for correcting. I'll keep an eye out for this going forward.

Okay. Thanks.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124006837

No, it makes sense. I'll revert.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124007341

Hi got it.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123899343

Thanks Brandon for the explanation.

Thanks for helping me.

It's good to know that I don't have to map out the entire route between two points if one already exists. I can correct it with tweaks. I don't have android so will need to work with the map directly.

As I am still learning, I am sure this won't be the only communications we will be having in the future.

Big thanks for today and in the future.
Szewah

And here
osm.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_foot&route=40.77768%2C-73.97837%3B40.77650%2C-73.97924#map=18/40.77732/-73.97882

I'd like to be able to work on correcting these.

Another example:

osm.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_foot&route=40.77768%2C-73.97837%3B40.78003%2C-73.97662#map=17/40.77893/-73.97722

Example of incorrect walking route

osm.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_foot&route=40.77768%2C-73.97837%3B40.77971%2C-73.97660#map=18/40.77885/-73.97633

Then they directed me to OSM to correct the changes.

So what is the best way to make these changes going forward? Please advise.