NOTICE: help.openstreetmap.org is being shutdown on 1st March 2024. Please use the OpenStreetMap Community Forum

If what is usually a sidewalk has shared cycling access along a roadway and is named or unnamed, should that be tagged as a Sidewalk or Cycle & Foot Path? Obviously, exclude the paths and trails that are not along roadways. I have changed some sidewalks with shared access to Cycle & Foot Paths in the greater Denver area. I do not live there but will visit this month. I checked my email on a new computer and received a one asking why I changed the type of some sidewalks to designated Cycle & Foot Paths. Each already had cycling and foot access listed. I did not guess with the assumption what was there was correct. Should those be tagged as Sidewalks or Cycle & Foot Paths when a sidewalk can fit the criteria with the cycling exception? Some of the paths that I changed to Cycle & Foot Paths could also be considered Bridle Paths. Most of those were not along roadways. I left the Bridle Paths alone since those are new to me. Some (foot) paths and cycling paths (not labeled together) had designated access to each type including motorized. Might I receive feedback please? I do not have any specific examples. I worked on 2 bus routes as I edited the other. I worked on bus routes 99 and 100 along Kipling Street but think I recall that along parts of S Kipling Pkwy or St.

asked 15 Jun '23, 02:14

Dark_Valor's gravatar image

Dark_Valor
36171823
accept rate: 0%


I suppose this might be related to this change you made here https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/137339657

The sidewalk was mapped as "highway=path" + "foot=yes" + "bicycle=yes".

You clicked on an upgrade suggestion offered by the iD editor. This is one of the problems with iD and its "presets", which changed tags into this: "highway=cycleway" + "foot=designated" + "bicycle=designated".

AFAIK, routing will work identically in both situations. In the first situation (before your change) the sidewalk was labelled as a generic path open to both pedestrians and cyclists, and now (after your change) it is primarily defined as a cycle path that allows pedestrians too. This is probably why the reason why another mapper asked why you did this.

permanent link

answered 02 Jul '23, 18:16

bxl-forever's gravatar image

bxl-forever
2106
accept rate: 0%

Some part of the confusion may come from this: Vocabulary such as "Sidewalk or Cycle & Foot Path" only exists within the iD editor.

The iD editor is just one of the available editors for OSM. The universal way to talk about objects in OSM is by inspecting the real tags that go to the database, e.g. "highway=cycleway".

permanent link

answered 02 Jul '23, 18:24

bxl-forever's gravatar image

bxl-forever
2106
accept rate: 0%

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:

×64

question asked: 15 Jun '23, 02:14

question was seen: 505 times

last updated: 02 Jul '23, 18:24

NOTICE: help.openstreetmap.org is being shutdown on 1st March 2024. Please use the OpenStreetMap Community Forum