From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Do you think a crash barrier should be tagged as a fence, too? This tag would be important, because there are some Streets, where a crash-barrier is between a cycleway and the street and you are not able to reach the cycleway from the other side of the road by bike and have to use the street which has lots of traffic.--KartoGrapHiti 10:29, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Why is a Google Definition shown; When we should really be using Wikipedia? --acrosscanadatrails 08:46, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Crash barrier is tagged as barrier=guard_rail or barrier=jersey_barrier--Jojo4u (talk) 18:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)



Why "fence:type" is not described here? It's found there: Key:fence_type --Markus 08:29, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

It's properly linked now.--Jojo4u (talk) 18:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Can this tag be used on an area?


It is shown this tag can't be used on an area in the value description. But the description says "This tag may be used either on a way or on a closed area." Which is correct? --Mfuji (talk) 10:35, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Closedway would be correct. But OSM does not distinguish between area area and closedway closed way.--geozeisig (talk) 12:51, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Okay, and Jojo4u has corrected. Thanks! --Mfuji (talk) 14:57, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Fences in residential areas?

Recently I have notices some residential areas have fences around houses / gardens mapped. While this is technically correct, it looks ugly when fences are rendered on a map (I do this on a hiking map, where fence barriers are quite important in outdoor areas). My first impression is this is beyond the detail level OSM is aiming at, but I would like to check for opinion of more experienced users before I delete or edit them.

An example can be seen at

Should fences which are dividing houses or gardens in residential areas be mapped in OSM, and if they should, how? --Ondrej Spanel (talk) 12:55, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Although I'm on the fence (get it?) about whether fences "look good" or not. We shouldn't really map things based on that. Otherwise, its mapping for the render. Which is generally looked down on. Also, that might apply only to the current OpenStreetMap style on the main website. There are a bunch of other maps out there though that might render fences better though. More generally, you shouldn't delete other peoples work based on personal preferences. It should only be done on policy or definition grounds and its usually better to message the particular user first in those cases if you can. Although, a case be made for deleting fences mapped on personal residential property because its to much detail. I think its a slim case though. Plus, there are instances of disaster or emergency relief groups using OSM and that kind of information could be useful for them. I instance, I know in California OSM is used for forest fire mapping. Its used by the fire department in Seattle too. Although, who knows if fences play a part in any of that, they could though. Really, OpenStreetMap is database of geographical information first and a map second. For that reason alone I think fences are fine to map. Even if they might not look good. --Adamant1 (talk) 18:03, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
This is an interesting and underrated question in my opinion. I agree that it looks unusual (and therefore maybe ugly). But the information is valuable: Is this a more "open" residential area where you are free to stroll (and children to play) between the houses or is everything basically private and no-access. So I am partly pro-fence. On the other hand, it is quite tedious to map them, so maybe this is also a reason why it's not done. Maybe it's even a case for a refining tag on landuse=residential? --Alfons234 (talk) 11:27, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Mapping existing fences is acceptable. If you think that it is ugly/useless you are free to avoid mapping them - but do not delete existing mapped fences Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:00, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Fence node

Please consider this situation:

  • A highway is barred by a fence going across the highway.
  • The fence is not mapped as such in its entirety.
    • Perhaps it doesn't extend far enough to be worth mapping as a way.
    • Perhaps the route is unknown.
  • The fence has no gate to allow access at this point.

In this case, in my humble opinion, the fence should be mapped as a node with barrier=fence. (Also, the node and/or the highway should probably be tagged with access=no when appropriate.)

Therefore, it seems to be an error in the documentation that this tag is not allowed on nodes. -- T99 (talk) 18:33, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

In such case mapping short way segment with fixme=continue on ends is strictly preferable Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:01, 4 May 2021 (UTC)


Mention how and when to tag individual w:fenceposts. E.g., some of them might be bigger than others and only occur every 300 meters. Also maybe they may be components of an e.g., w:Kwalliso and and have humanitarian mapping value. Jidanni (talk) 18:33, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Hhhmm, barrier=fencepost mapped as a node would be an interesting idea. I do a lot of fence mapping and it would be pretty helpful for my use case. I don't see any tags out there currently that have the word fencepost in them though. Except for one use of barrier=first_fencepost. It's still a good idea for a tag though. Really, I'm suppressed there isn't one already. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:48, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
BTW, there's also 13 uses of barrier=post. Are they maybe considered bollards? I wouldn't think so. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:50, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
It is likely not useful and not needed Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:02, 4 May 2021 (UTC)