This thread will be used to provide visibility into the areas we are mapping as part of Meta’s organised editing/mapping activities for the UK in 2026.
Project #1
Dear UK OSM Community,
My team is organising mapping efforts in North East Scotland. The main maproulette tasks for this area includes:
- https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/50534
- https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/53716
- Our mapping efforts will also include mapping sidewalks and crossings within complex intersections.
I’ve listed this project in our wiki as well: Organised Editing/Activities/Meta/Pedestrian Mapping - OpenStreetMap Wiki.
Please use this thread to provide feedback. Thank you so much.
What’s the motivation behind this work and the focus on pedestrian crossings? Why are you beginning with North East Scotland?
A lot of towns and cities in North East Scotland, we’re still trying to map where there are shops. There’s lots of basic mapping to be done before fixing up all the details.
The Map Team for Meta’s organised editing (Organised Editing/Activities/Meta - OpenStreetMap Wiki) is currently empty.
1 Like
@RVR015, Please ensure that there is an organised activity page for each activity that you organise. For each one there should also be an entry in the activities table in the wiki, so that if people actually search for e.g. “Scotland” in that table they will find it. Right now, they can’t.
Also, the entries in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/Meta/Pedestrian_Mapping do not seem to reflect current activity. A search of that page suggests no current activity in London, yet just three days ago there was this edit west of Battersea Park.
Please ensure that all ongoing activities have an entry in the activities table in the wiki and a page describing the activity itself. I wouldn’t expect the activities required to add pedestrian infrastructure in (say) London or North-East Scotland to be particularly similar, though some of the basics will be the same.
Those are (respectively) " United Kingdom - Fix Pedestrian Intersections with Highways", which shows no data for the UK and " Global - OSM Crossing Nodes at High Cardinality Road Intersections", which does show data for the UK.
Will this involve a survey?
Motivation? It’s Meta. So financial at its centre. Project mentions their glasses. ‘Look what footways and crossings are available if you look at the data.’ Instead of just looking in front of you.
2 Likes
A lot of towns and cities in North East Scotland, we’re still trying to map where there are shops. There’s lots of basic mapping to be done before fixing up all the details.
Maybe, but we shouldn’t say to people “you cannot map what you want to map until you finish mapping what I want you to map”. Yes there are arguments to be had that some things are more important than others, but unless you are paying someone to do the mapping you don’t get to dictate what they focus on. If someone wants to go and map all the schools, or drain covers or street lights, and ignore the shops, that’s up to them, it doesn’t make the map any worse.
(I’ll leave aside the issue of some previous organisations making pedestrian routing worse, and assume good faith here)
12 Likes
@SomeoneElse @LivingWithDragons
Thank you for the response.
- The goal of this project is to map pedestrian infrastructure data to support pedestrian navigation in Scotland by mapping sidewalks and crosswalks. We’re beginning with North East Scotland and will expand to other areas of Scotland as the project progresses.
- I’ve created a dedicated project page at Organised_Editing/Activities/Meta/Pedestrian_Mapping/Scotland and added our project to the Activities table.
- The team is listed. Select expand to see the list. However, we’ll update the Map Team page so that it is current.
- We are using aerial imagery and street-level imagery for this project.
- If there are mapping practices relevant to Scotland you’d like for us to maintain, please feel free to share any relevant wikis/forum links. For example, I noticed that crossings in this area commonly use
crossing:island=yes/noandtactile_paving=yes/no.
1 Like
A search of that page suggests no current activity in London, yet just three days ago there was this edit west of Battersea Park.
You’re right - thanks for the call-out on this. This edit was out of scope, and I’ve addressed it with the team.
1 Like
That’s mainly down to StreetComplete I think.
You will struggle if you restrict yourselves to that. Taking an example at random, you can have an idea about some tags, but not others (e.g. the flush kerb). The existence of StreetComplete edits means that there are on-the-ground mappers; please do not guess at infrastructure remotely where you are not sure. If a crossing is added with incomplete tags, StreetComplete will prompt on-the-ground mappers to fill in the gaps.
Thanks for that. However, I notice that the “community objections” column currently says “no”. My reading of the comments above (and on e.g. IRC) is that they are not entirely positive? 
2 Likes
I’ve changed it to ‘Discussion ongoing’ with a link to this conversation to provide better transparency.
Please do not guess at infrastructure remotely where you are not sure. If a crossing is added with incomplete tags, StreetComplete will prompt on-the-ground mappers to fill in the gaps.
I will emphasize to the team to only map features that we can confidently verify from aerial and street-level imagery. Where we can’t determine something (e.g. tactile paving, flush kerbs), we’ll leave those tags blank rather than guess. That way local mappers and StreetComplete users can fill them in accurately.
2 Likes
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
3 Likes
Some of your mapping elsewhere has raised concerns.
I just want to add a supportive comment to pedestrian mapping when done correctly. We had a long discussion about the value of different types of pedestrian mapping but in terms of subjective value judgements, I consider mapping the accessibility and existence of crossings as a major contribution to the value of OSM at least on a par with adding amenities. I agree with Dezza, we don’t make value judgments about what people choose to map as long as they do it well.
8 Likes
Hello @Wynndale We’re following this conversation: Highway=pedestrian split and tagged as highway=footway + footway=crossing at intersections? - #12 by RVR015
Hello! I have a question from my team. We wanted to reach out for opinions/suggestions in order to make the right decision. This might also be better left for surveys.
"Would the local community agree to update sidewalk tagging on segment w1327836265 from sidewalk=left to sidewalk:both=no? This would potentially be supported by the lack of complete infrastructure for a crossing at 57.1214792, -2.1256352 and the 44m distance to crossing way/1536351343.
I am hesitant to change it to sidewalk:both=no without community approval because: There is a defined crossing way (w1536351343) at 57.121329, -2.126160, which is approximately 44m away from the roundabout. Because of this distance I would like to know whether or not the community considers the crossing w1536351343 to be associated with the roundabout segment w1327836265. There is another potential crossing closer to the roundabout at approximately 57.1214792, -2.1256352. This is only suggested because the North side of Garthdee Rd has well defined pedestrian infrastructure, including a path leading away from the sidewalk towards Garthdee Rd, with a flushed kerb. However, there is no kerb cut on the south side of Garthdee Rd and unlike the other two crossings at this roundabout, the traffic calming island has raised kerbs and is much smaller than its neighbors (w1536353160). Would the community still count this as an unmarked crossing without the presence of a kerb cut on the south side of Garthdee Rd?
Thank you all in advance for your time and consideration. All ground imagery photos are from Bing 2020 and Aerial Imagery is Bing Aerial.”
1 Like
I would tag that way sidewalk:both=no due to the lack of immediate crossing infrastructure (you have to walk down the road, cross, and then back up again, rather than walking around the outside of the roundabout. I would only tag sidewalk:left=separate if there is a crossing within the triangular road flare approaching the roundabout. Realistically speaking, I don’t think it really matters too much to quibble about sidewalk=no/separate in cases like this where all pavements are mapped separately. They ultimately mean the same thing routing-wise.
Where there is an explicitly offset crossing a short distance away from a junction/roundabout, I would not map an unmarked crossing at the place a crossing would normally be. The dropped kerb on the North side is only due to the driveway and it’s clear there isn’t intended to be an unmarked crossing here. However, if the signalised crossing was not here, I would map this as an informal crossing (with appropriate kerb=raised) to provide routing connectivity across the road. Although without streetlevel imagery indicating a raised kerb I would likely end up tagging as crossing=unmarked.
3 Likes
Thank you so much!
I was curious about more detail than they’re a commercial company. Even in the case of Meta the motivation could be “PR dept say we need to give back to the project we use, so sidewalks was seen as an easy project to make KPIs about”.
But that doesn’t seem the case from this thread. Thanks for pointing out the glasses mention, I missed that.
Last November we hosted State of the Map Europe in this part of Scotland. It was really cool to see Said (a Meta employee) post on LinkedIn videos about pedestrian routing on Meta glasses.. the example being the little city I live in and map, Dundee! This is a new feature so it’s not a available everywhere, but we got to see it being used.
Maybe I need to improve the sidewalk data before they publicly release it for use in Dundee. It’s not something I will personally prioritise (as I said, there’s retail areas still missing in cities here) but I will be excited if it creates increased and differing use of OSM.
2 Likes
I was in Dundee too, just likely interested in something else.
I’d definitely map the driveway - it’s a thing that exists and it provides step-free access to the road.
The other thing that I’m not convinced about is whether pedestrians would actually follow this path, or whether they would “just cross the road” using the island to the west of the roundabout as a refuge. The have a perfect legal right to do that, and the traffic visible suggests that it’s entirely practical to do that too. Obviously, survey and map the kerb on the south side if it continues.
2 Likes