I don't think we are going to have a single rule that always applies, but:
generally a shared driveway
- will break the highway=* gutter with a kerb ramp
- usually won't have a kerb
- usually on private land
- usually maintained by the owners
- letter boxes and garbage bins usually need to be
Hey Matthew,
I think the distinction is inherited from the distinction between
highway=service and highway=residential. A "regular" driveway shouldn't
be a residential road, and a narrow, but otherwise unremarkable
residential road doesn't become a service road.
I do feel as though there
So what then distinguishes highway=residential from a shared driveway in
Sebastian's 3 examples?
* The first way 818426144 is an unnamed shared service road, so seems to
neatly fit the pipestem example as explained. The addresses in this style
of development are likely to be unit numbers,
Yes, as someone very involved with bicycle routing (and infrastructure), thank
you for noting the distinction that bicycle infrastructure tagging is ONE thing
(and important) and bicycle route tagging (inclusion of usually the latter
elements in a route relation) is ANOTHER (important) thing.
Thanks all!
I've added shared lanes to Nelson St, so I'll update the Note & pass on
your other comments to the OP.
Thanks
Graeme
On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 at 12:27, Tom Brennan wrote:
> The problem is that the street in question may not be part of a formal
> route.
>
> Sydney has a lot of streets
On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 at 08:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick
wrote:
>
> As I said, I flicked an e-mail to the PM & C Department but so far, not
> even an acknowledgement, let alone an answer :-(
>
After quite a delay, I finally received an answer!
Basically confirms what we had already discussed:
"the
Interesting discussion; it does seem like the consensus is landing on
the side of service=pipestem.
There are 668 instances of driveway=pipestem in Australia:
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gU6, but there is 0 instances of
service=pipestem: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1gUd. However, it seems
In the global community it's still disputed, see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:service%3Ddriveway#Pipestems
and my proposal to have this as an editor preset
https://github.com/openstreetmap/id-tagging-schema/pull/239 where the
tagging question is still not resolved.
I've actually
I think I started the last discussion on this, so I'll wade in!
Driveways are a bit of a nightmare - there are lots that don't fit
neatly into one bucket or another.
We did agree that service=driveway, driveway=pipestem was better than
service=pipestem.
It's probably 6 of one, half a dozen
Hi Seb!
The last time this came up on the mailing list
(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-September/015014.html)
most people seemed to approve of the following mapping:
highway=service
service=driveway
driveway=pipestem
Dian
On 2022-03-15 20:16, Sebastian Azagra
Hi all,
Had a query regarding the mapping of driveways / shared driveways as there
seems to be quite a number of different approaches in the data.
Below are three examples of similar ways that have different tags used in each
instance.
Highway=service
Service= driveway
11 matches
Mail list logo
