Pedestrian vs footway

Support
1

I notice that highway=pedestrian is included in the CS import, but not highway=footway. Not sure if there is a resoning behind this? Is it intended or wrong?

1 Like
2

i hope its intended. A pedestrian area is for instance walking area’s in city centres. sometimes delivery cars are permitted there. Imho, these should be included in CS since it’s a (limited) driveable road, mainly meant for pedestrians.
for instance here

image
image1254×829 180 KB

the yellow area is all pedestrian, and the thin lines are the ‘streets’ where sometimes cars are permitted. these are runnable and part of CS i guess.

But here in OSM:

image
image1290×789 190 KB

Heideweg and Kampweg are paths/trails in a park. They are named but should not be part of CS (again, imho)
Koestraat lower on this map, is a valid runnable road. Its a field’road’ accessible by agricultural traffic and has a name.

Comments?

1 Like
3

Agreed. The trails may not be maintained well enough to run in some places so shouldn’t be included in CS count. ( still i like to run them if I can to color in the map )

1 Like
4

OK, good points, but this time I’m not talking about Pedestrian area, it’s a street with the tag highway=pedestrian (or Feature Type Pedestrian Street). But maybe that doesn’t change your comment. Actually when I start thinking about it, some of the “foot paths” in my neighbourhood might be wrongly labelled. If it’s a paved road where motor vehicles are not allowed, maybe it should not be foot path at all, maybe they should be Pedestrian streets as well…

2 Likes
5

I for myself decided also to run the unnamed roads (mainly unmaintained tracks), for when they get names in the future.

1 Like
6

In my personal experience, foot paths that have a name are almost always maintained and runnable. If they are in such a poor state it might be more correct to tag them as ‘unmaintained track’. Especially in older cities in Europe, there is often a very narrow line between a pedestrian street or a foot path. In my personal opinion, it should be reconsidered to include the named foot paths.

And after all, aren’t they also usually the most pleasant places to run?

EDIT: I think the wikipedia definition of “street” (Street - Wikipedia) lends credit to my statement.

Lastly, I understand this is not an easy decision to make as it requires updating pretty much everything everywhere and will make many others sad for losing their 100% completion.

1 Like
7

I’d like to heartily endorse this comment. If a foot path has a name why shouldn’t it be in CityStrides? Living streets get in and they’re often the same…pedestrian areas get in and they’re even less streets than foot paths are. If it’s runnable and it has a name it should be in CityStrides.

2 Likes