Hello,
I am wondering, how to create / tag the construction you see on the image attached:
I would tend to think that this is a bench as node within a way with surface sett - and this way is wheelchair accessible.
But I does not really fit. Maybe there is another option.
Any feedback would be appreciated.
The wiki page for amenity=bench mentions that wheelchair=* can be used to indicate “whether the bench is suitable to be used with a wheelchair”. That’s not a very precise description, but (from my judgment, I’m not a wheelchair user) I’d say it applies here due to the lack of armrest on the bench and the designated space next to it.
If such tagging is possible, is it really necessary to map the space next to it as well? I’d make sure wheelchair-related infrastructure like kerbs are properly mapped on the path leading to the bench, though.
This is how I would map the place as well. To my understanding the bench and the wheelchair area are 2 different objects, designed for a wheelchair user (resting on the marked area) accompanied by one or more persons without disabilities who would take place on the bench.
1 way with surface=compacted representing the path + 1 short connected way with surface=sett + wheelchair=designated + 1 node each for the bench and the wastebin.
Just being pedantic, but the only assumption that can be made here is that they are not using wheelchairs; they might just as well be e.g. blind 
Teasing aside: what do you mean by “connected way”? Would the side of the area that’s along the path share nodes with the path way? 
Yes, this is pedantic but of course you are right!
My mapping approach would look like this:
The short way tagged as highway=footway, the highlighted part additionally as wheelchair=designated, + the bench and the bin.
The short way tagged as highway=footway, the highlighted part additionally as wheelchair=designated, + the bench and the bin.
it’s not a footway IMHO, maybe highway=rest_area foot=designated, wheelchair=yes?
If it should be mapped as footway, it should be mapped as an area, because it is not directed
Thank you very much for your feedback.
I really appreciate it.
From what I see, this is a situation which would allow for different solutions.
My first approach is now this one:
Basically, I followed the recommendation from @dieterdreist . I also liked the variant highlighted by @Map_HeRo . My only concern is that when I connect the foodway to the existing foodway, then this would look completely disproportionate. But I am still open to suggestions and discussions.
oops, sorry for the confusion, I think highway=rest_areas are commonly not referring to pedestrians but to drivers who rest, the more common alternative for the area IMHO is area=yes and highway=pedestrian or footway. Again, sorry for the confusion
Reviewing the discussion and the rest_area definition, I went for the “pedantic” solution highlighted by @Map_HeRo before.
See changeset: Changeset: 164345190 | OpenStreetMap
Still a lot of mapping to do in this area. But it is getting better and better.
Thank you.
