From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Public-images-osm logo.svg foot = yes
Sinnbild Fußgänger.svg
Roads and other objects where the public has a legally-enshrined right for access on foot Edit this description in the wiki page. Edit this description in the data item.
Group: restrictions
Used on these elements
may be used on nodesmay be used on waysmay be used on areas (and multipolygon relations)should not be used on relations (except multipolygon relations)
Useful combination
See also
Status: de facto

foot=yes is applied where the public has a legally-enshrined right for access on foot (a right of way), as opposed to foot=permissive where the owner can revoke the permission at will.

Examples of usage

foot=yes is used for instance to indicate:

  • that access for pedestrians on that way is a legally enshrined (if applicable in national/regional law) : foot=yes instead of foot=permissive
  • to indicate that walking on the carriageway of a residential road is allowed, since in that case there is no parallel path or sidewalk (mapped as a separate way in OSM) that is mandatory for pedestrians highway=residential + foot=yes (instead of foot=use_sidepath )
  • to indicate that walking on a certain cycleway is legal: highway=cycleway + foot=yes
  • to differentiate access for pedestrians and vehicles, such as on a service road with foot=yes + vehicle=private

Conflicting tags

  • In some cases mapper may wish to use foot=designated to indicate that usage by foot is explicitly mentioned on signs in the field (such as on a segregated footway and cycleway tagged on one way). A mapper that does not wish to use Multiple values (which are not as well supported as single values) must in this case choose between indicating the legal basis of foot-access (foot=yes or foot=permissive) or the explicit signage foot=designated. This is the consequence of many values in access=* answering different questions.


Some mappers argue that foot=yes is so obvious in some cases that it is unnecessary to add it or even should be removed. In the past this has lead to mass deletions in (undiscussed) mechanical edits and in many smaller batches because of now repaired validator rules.

The value that mappers give to tags such as foot=yes depend on ones interests in detailed access-mapping and the legal situation in a country; in a country with a strong version of Freedom to roam or without mandatory sidepaths for pedestrians there might be less need for or interest in tags such as foot=yes. However, in countries where many ways only have permissive access, the distinction between foot=yes and foot=permissive is relevant even on a highway=footway, however counter-intuitive that might seem to some.

In any case, be considerate and don't remove tags that you don't understand

See also

Possible tagging mistakes

If you know places with this tag, verify if it could be tagged with another tag.
Automated edits are strongly discouraged unless you really know what you are doing!