How should maintenance footpaths be tagged?

[waldyrious (Waldir Pimenta)]

I’ve been trying to increase sidewalk mapping coverage in my city, and have noticed that in many cases there are pseudo-sidewalks (especially in bridges) that can technically work as sidewalks but are usually rather narrow, and not always connected to the sidewalks network. I believe that these (along with the footpaths inside tunnels) are meant for maintenance (and potentially emergency) access.

What is the proper way to map these? Wikipedia refers to this kind of infrastructure as “catwalks”, but I couldn’t find anything in the OSM wiki using this term. Taginfo shows a few instances of sidewalk=catwalk, footway=catwalk, and similar, but usage is very sparse.

Would something like highway=footway + footway=catwalk be an acceptable way to tag these ATYL-style? Or are there already existing tags that would fit this purpose better? Some examples of tags I dug up that have a bit more usage:

• footway=service — but this this seems too generic and vague.
• service=emergency_access or emergency=designated— but these seem too specific (i.e. it doesn’t cover the case of general maintenance).
• usage sounds promising, and there are already a few instances of usage=maintenance in the wild.

So my current inclination is to go with highway=footway + footway=service + usage=maintenance. Does that seem reasonable, or should we embrace footway=catwalk and document it explicitly? I confess that as a non-native speaker of English, the latter feels inadequate, but I guess with proper documentation it’s no more awkward than e.g. idiosyncrasies like the broad definition of “highway” that we use.

[Minh_Nguyen (Minh Nguyễn)]

Are you referring to something like the footpath past this sign? Physically it’s still a sidewalk, even if it’s closed under normal circumstances. I’d use access restriction tags to set it off-limits.

File:Emergency Use Only sign on Lamar Boulevard Bridge, Austin, Texas.jpg

A catwalk can also refer to something like this, recalling a cat’s love of climbing:

But by referring to the sidewalk beside the roadway as a catwalk, you are communicating its narrow quality and service orientation:

New York Police Used These Tiny ‘Catwalk Cars’ to Patrol the City’s Tunnels

[Mateusz_Konieczny]

@waldyrious

pseudo-sidewalks (especially in bridges) that can technically work as sidewalks but are usually rather narrow, and not always connected to the sidewalks network. I believe that these (along with the footpaths inside tunnels) are meant for maintenance (and potentially emergency) access

Do you mean ones like

?

( image from Most kolejowy - Żukowo )

I have seen highway=footway access=no used for them

I guess that usage=maintenance;emergency_access or service=maintenance;emergency_access would not be wrong there

[Kovoschiz]

“Catwalk” can refer to the actual parts of sidewalks closest to the roadway for accessing kerbside vehicles across verges, confusingly either in contrast or synonymous to “carriage-walk”. Another term is “landing steps”. https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/city/depts/cdot/sdwlk/general/SCSP_FAQ_2014-05-19.pdf
footway=service seems confusing in the end. The cover photo is a walkway next to a road, which may be seen as a =sidewalk independent of whether it’s inside a carpark. File:Walkway - geograph.org.uk - 509930.jpg - OpenStreetMap Wiki
Problem of footway= is conflicting with =sidewalk for sidewalks only used for maintenance or secondarily emergencies, as replied. So solutions other than footway= needs to be considered.