When trying to get some walking directions using some OSM routing services all of them failed to route through a bridge specifically marked for pedestrians. (Here is a permalink to the bridge.)

Examining the issue it turned out that the problem is NOT with the bridge but with a way marked as highway=platform that 'leads' to the bridge. At least the original mapper assumed that the platform will be considered by routing services as something that can be traversed by foot.

I'm not sure what the correct solution to this is. Is it correct to assume that this is a bug in the routing engines (strangely all of them ignore highway=platform)?

Or should I draw a highway=pedestrian beside the platform so that it is obvious that you can pass there?

Wondering what the correct solution is.

asked 13 Apr '11, 15:32

rizsolt's gravatar image

rizsolt
1111
accept rate: 0%

edited 14 Apr '11, 06:50

Besides a general solution about the processing of highway=platform by all known routing engines, can you edit your question and add a permalink to that area where that way is?

(13 Apr '11, 17:09) stephan75

Added the permalink. I don't understand what are you exactly suggesting about the routing engines. Should I open bugs for each of them? Isn't more discussion necessary?

(14 Apr '11, 06:54) rizsolt

@rizsolt: Of course more discussion ca be helpful about this topic. But IMHO any of the OSM mailing lists or http://forum.osm.org is a better place for such a kind of finding solutions for a complex topic like "tagging and routing" ... come over.

(14 Apr '11, 09:56) stephan75

@stephan75 I was (and still am) hoping to get a definitive answer on how to map this correctly :)

(14 Apr '11, 11:14) rizsolt

My advice is to do the same as with the renderers: don't map for routing engines. highway=platform is a legal way that can be used by passengers. There are lots of tags currently ignored by most routing engines or insufficiently used (like areas). It's a bug that should be reported and not circumvented by mapping an additional, non-existing way.

permanent link

answered 14 Apr '11, 07:32

scai's gravatar image

scai ♦
31.1k18281434
accept rate: 23%

I wouldn't necessarily assume that highway=platform implies unfettered pedestrian access. Certainly in the UK, many railway platforms are 'gated' and only offer access to those with valid rail tickets.

If the platform is open to all pedestrians, then you should add an access tag, probably foot=yes or foot=permissive.

permanent link

answered 14 Apr '11, 09:32

Richard's gravatar image

Richard ♦
27.6k40245368
accept rate: 19%

There are gated railway platforms here too, but AFAIR railway=platform should be used to tag them.

This particular platform is for a bus stop for public transit, most of those here is free for use by pedestrians altough some of them is not intended to be used as such (usually only if it does not lead anywhere). At this place the platform is just a broadened sidewalk/pavement used for both functions.

I'm not sure if foot=yes is the perfect way to map this...

(14 Apr '11, 11:10) rizsolt

There are also tags for gates or other types of barriers and, of course, the well-known access tag.

(14 Apr '11, 19:35) scai ♦
Your answer
toggle preview

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:

×250
×39

question asked: 13 Apr '11, 15:32

question was seen: 4,270 times

last updated: 14 Apr '11, 19:35

powered by OSQA