On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 4:08 PM, nicholas ingalls nicholas.inga...@gmail.com
wrote:
My personal preference is to enable the JOSM sidewalk style and then use
the sidewalk:right sidewalk:left, sidewalk:both, or sidewalk:none tags on
the actual street. The footpaths are just about useless (as in
sidewalks later. However, having this sidewalk wonderings only
means is that the map is really getting detailed!
Cheers,
Daniel
From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com]
Sent: February-02-13 06:15
To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Sidewalks
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 4:08 PM
My personal preference is to enable the JOSM sidewalk style and then use
the sidewalk:right sidewalk:left, sidewalk:both, or sidewalk:none tags on
the actual street. The footpaths are just about useless (as in the example
above) as they are not related to the street in anyway. So the routing
I came across this when I was working on Map Roulette connectivity corrections -
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=42.98773840069771lon=-81.24551922082901zoom=18
I thought it was not advised to digitize sidewalks along urban streets - Are
there any other opinions on this?
--
Bernie Connors,
Curious. I wonder if they were trying to get pedestrian routing working.
Vaguely reminds me of something I read somewhere for streets maps for people
who are blind.
Why not ask the person who added them?
--G
Sent from my iPhone
On 2013-01-29, at 20:10, Connors, Bernie (SNB)
Personally I don't map sidewalks like that but I respect local
mappers' work and would not change this, as it isn't really wrong. I
don't think there's a strong consensus to map sidewalks merely as
attributes of the adjoining road, and there are a lot of problems with
that approach, too. E.g. how
6 matches
Mail list logo
