#DailyBloggingChallenge (311/365)
The #OpenStreetMap data varies in #Wien with some sectors quite well detailed and other sector lacking in information.
One thing that jumps out, at least in sector 13, is that there is no real system how sidewalks should be mapped. Some highways are so bad that they use both systems. Meaning putting the sidewalk details onto the highway and mapping it separately.
@barefootstache there are different approaches, some mappers like to map every sidewalk as a separate line to make it more visible in the map, others prefer the other method as in Austria it is allowed to cross streets at any position and not just at specific crossings.
312: most trees were imported as open data around 10 or so years ago (city of vienna provides all street trees including some details as open data), but many of them are not up to date anymore for licence reasons (CC BY vs ODBL)
@derloris it is interesting that both approaches exist on the same highway segment. I would say that that is false and one should move the data to the more detailed approach (as a line). Whereas on the other side, I don't want to disturb the practices of the city too much.
In kind of returns to the question "are you mapping for the router or mapping as the actual state of the world."
@barefootstache Yes, I would agree, both on one highway is one too much.
Well kind of, but I think It's not just a routing question, it's also about reclaiming public space if a rendering maybe implies a specific (car-centric) behavior. Furthermore it can look like other separate footways which are really not connected to the road (e.g. because of green space, a fence or a law which prohibits it). A solution could be if common rendering styles would render non-separate sidewalks in some way...