Talk:Toronto
PATH mapping: looking for advice!
I've been commissioned to survey and map the (surprisingly large) PATH network for a proprietary routing application that will be using OSM data. The next week or two will see me mapping and remapping the PATH tunnels in OSM pretty intensely! I'm wondering if anyone here might have any input on the best way to map this. I started by creating what has become a rather large relation (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5441759) for all of the path segments. Then I started added building entrance nodes to the relation with "role"="entrance". Then it occurred to me that shops would probably do well to be added to the relation too if they're accessible from the PATH. I've only added a few shops, and I'm not sure I'll add more since it's out of the scope of this particular project, but it's something to think about. Here are some other thoughts in no particular order:
- Many of the PATH segments are tagged "name"="PATH". This seems less than ideal, since the name would seem to belong to the whole entity and not to any particular segment. Are there PATH segments with their own names? The only example I can think of just now is the Skywalk, but I expect I will find others.
- Almost every segment of the PATH is tagged 'highway='footway', but I could see a good argument being made for 'highway'='corridor' or 'highway'='pedestrian'. Is there any value in making such distinctions, or is it simply best to pick one and be consistent?
- Is access pretty consistent throughout the PATH? Could I remove redundant access tags from the PATH segments and add the necessary access to the relation? My thought is that then if there are any doors in particular that have more restricted access, the access tagging on those could be assumed to override that of the relation.
- Is it worth tagging doorways between buildings? Are these always open, or do they sometimes close to restrict access?
I'd appreciate any input y'all might have on this! Nate Wessel (talk) 20:30, 16 August 2015 (UTC)