Route relation : walking : which ways get added?

Communities United Kingdom
1

At a road junction in a town, the route relation for Hereward Way walking route is composed of the car* highways. The footpaths aren’t included.

Should they be, or does this needlessly complicate things? See especially the pedestrian crossing across Eastgate at the top of Station Rd.

Thanks

*or better, universal

2

It should definitely follow the footpaths instead, it’s likely they weren’t mapped when the walking route was added :slight_smile:

4 Likes
3

… with the caveat that the footpaths, if mapped separately, should allow people to wander across the road if it’s legal to do that.

I’ve seen examples of both sorts - LDP signage that explicitly routes you via a signed crossing, and LDP signage that assume you can “just cross the road” even when there are kerbs and no signed crossing.

1 Like
4

I don’t follow, sorry.

5

Here is an example of the sort of thing. There’s a gap in a relation, but I suspect in reality the signposts if there are any will just send people down Church Street (walking either side of the road), then across Monastery Street and then along Longport (again, walking either side of the road).

According to OSM there is no way to just cross the road.

The footpath at the side of Longport does make sense to be mapped separately (there’s a car parking area between it and the road, but some of the others make less sense. At the very least there are links missing.

1 Like