I’m a new to osm and I have some very basic questions. I’m facing some connectivity issues for my town, which I would like to address. Those inaccurate data results in very strange routing directions for pedestrians and bike.
Here is list of current problems:
Missing link between underpass (tunnel) and main road, which makes the underpass useless. Should I just add a simple footpath or is there any better way to do it ? (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/136328531)
Cycleway having an open end. It is pretty much the same question. Is a simple footpath appropriate? (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3654794529)
How to make a new cross point (split a segment https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/450110877)). In particular I’m trying to connect a cycleway with a car path. Should this new split point should have any special tags ? I guess not because existing ones lack such tags.
Is having a main road accessible by foot AND having a dedicated footpath at the same time (sidewalk) a bad practice ? I guess it is simply wrong… if I’m right Should I just restrict the main road for pedestrians and allow it only where needed.
As for the cycleway, in general I connect the cycleway to the main road. In some case you have a line running diagonally from the main road to the parallel section of the cycleway.
I do connect such footpaths as well.
In case there is a cycleway running (OSM way) in parallel to the main road, the main road gets bicycle=use_sidepath. At least this is the case for Germany, The Netherlands and Belgium, because the cyclists are still allowed to use the main road to get to the other side. That is, of course, unless there is a traffic sign that explicitly forbids cycling on the main road.
AFAIK there is no such tag yet for pedestrians, although I have seen it mentioned before.
Mapping is always awkward where one begins or ends a section of micro-mapping, and you do, for example, have to merge a separately mapped sidewalk into the road , when you stop mapping it separately.
However, there are some situations where a router is expected to be intelligent, e.g. if you map a sidewalk separately, it should normally assume that pedestrians can cross the road, or board a car at anywhere along the parallel run where there is no explicit barrier or restriction.
Incidentally, most parallel cycle paths in the UK are only advisory, and many experienced cyclists prefer not to use them because they have to stop at every side road, or have to avoid pedestrians who ignore the distinction between cycle and pedestrian parts.
In the case of your first example, the sensible thing is probably to map explicit sidewalks up to, at least, the next road junction on either side.
I don’t have all the facts for your second example, but normally one would just map a node on the intersection, and, if cycles are not allowed to turn off the cycle path, add cycle restrictions to the road. Highways should never cross unless there is either a node at the intersection, or there is a layer difference and bridge or tunnel, as appropriate.