Talk:Tag:foot=use sidepath

Tag status

This tag was to my knowledge never formally adopted, but is used too often to leave undocumented. I have asked some of the mappers who champion the use of this tag to document it, but no one could be bothered, so I stubbed out an article here. JeroenHoek (talk) 17:17, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

What about sidewalk=separate?

Shouldn’t we mention this one: sidewalk=separate? It is generally use to convey the same kind of information, i.e. footways are mapped separately and routing engines should use them instead of the roads.

Also, perhaps we should add a recommendation here: if routers treat this as foot=no, mappers should ensure there are sufficient connectors on all sides. Bxl-forever (talk) 15:34, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Similar information, but not the same. foot=use_sidepath means that there is a mandatory parallel way that must be used instead, which is not necessarily a sidewalk (a shared cycleway is common as well). sidewalk=separate, sidewalk:left=separate, and sidewalk:right=separate mean that there is a parallel sidewalk, but say nothing about the legality of walking on the street itself (although usually local laws do make the use of the sidewalk compulsory).

A note on correct routing by ensuring that the parallel way is connected properly can't hurt, feel free to edit the page. --JeroenHoek (talk) 15:50, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Though mentioning sidewalk=separate may be useful, for both users and data consumers Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 16:27, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Don't map local legislation if not bound to specific objects

In my opinion, the tag foot=use_sidepath should only be used, if there's a sign that says the sidepath must be used. Otherwise it does conflict with our 'Don't map local legislation if not bound to specific objects' principle. Better to use sidewalk=separate instead. --Dafadllyn (talk) 21:26, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

discouraged use?

is there a way to tag a road as 'discouraged' or similar where it's legal to walk a road but it's dangerous and there is a separate walkway? --Trublu (talk) 17:53, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

@Trublu: Yes, though in general we would not tag general "not recommended" (as threshold and reason differs from person to person - some may want to avoid unlit ways, some may prefer to avoid ways with poor surface, some with high traffic). What specific problem is there and in which router/map/other data consumer this ways should be avoided? BTW, typically https://community.openstreetmap.org/ will have more people answering. Wiki talk pages are quite low traffic and have weird interface.

Oh, and properly marking alternative may help. Router was recently giving weird cycling instructions (to ride on main road instead of using footway with legal cycling) Turns out that this sidewalk was missing bicycle=yes. I added it and hope that with new data routing will get less silly.

And if you want advise for specific place - linking it would help.

In general, this info (if not officially signed) would not go into foot=* Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 06:43, 28 May 2024 (UTC)