Just added area=yes support to t@h. Morwen 10:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Cycling on a highway=pedestrian
Likely the law is different in every country so we could try to assemble a list of whether cyclists are not tolerated, tolerated, allowed or designated to drive on any highway=pedestrian roads and if there are any other requirements.
You can split the entries in (a)/(b), since a highway=pedestrian can be something that is known in the legal text as a "walking street" (or your local equivalent wording) or just a road that is in all other senses a pedestrian highway
|Country||Cyclists allowed by law||Cyclists must give unobstructed passage to pedestrians||Maxspeed||Motorcars ever allowed?||Pedestrians may not "unnecessarily obstruct" any vehicles|
|Belgium||Depends on the traffic sign||Cyclists cannot obstruct pedestrians and vice versa||No rule, should just be careful for pedestrians||Depends on the traffic sign||Yes|
|Finland||(a): Specifically yes, (a2) is not used
(b):Yes or unknown
|(a): Yes (applies to drivers of all vehicles)
(b): Normal caution
|(a): "Adjusted to pedestrians and not exceed 20"
(b): National limit + normal caution?
|(a): When the only possible route to destination
(b): only with additional signs (mostly present for service or destination traffic, though)
This won't yet be an attempt to define these to be the defaults for any country, we could seek to make a summary once we have enough data.Alv 07:11, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
footway vs pedestrian
- The physical difference is that highway=pedestrian is a road that previously was a normal street (in city environments, mostly), or it is a Town square. Alv 09:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Vovkav 07:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC): And what if the editor doesn't know if it was, or was not? What about 2 otherwise identical roads, that are different in their history? Is there anyone who needs visually distinguished history of the road? And still - do we need that ambiguity?
- The result is that the structure/look is different. Well, sometimes pedestrian roads have been built as such from the beginning, but they are similar to those that were previously proper roads. Alv 08:02, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Vovkav 09:32, 24 April 2010 (UTC): damn. Are there any objective, history- and surrounding- independent criteria to tell pedestrian from footway?
- As stated on the page, main criteria is that road is as wide as normal (designated for vehicles) one, so vehicles pass it easily. --Vovanium 22:38, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
ways towards apartment buildings
- the description of highway=pedestrian sounds like, it's meant for bigger streets only. what about ways that lead towards apartment buildings, which are mainly for pedestrians, but broad enough for motorcars and emergency vehicles. normally there are one or two pollards, which can be tilted, so cars can enter if the owner permits it. footway doesn't fit in such a case and highway=service indicates a primary usage for vehicles. i suggest to use highway=pedestrian + an additional tag pedestrian=apartments. --Flaimo 14:52, 5 June 2011 (BST)
" and make connecting nodes at all intersections with the pedestrian area"
"For town centres and civic areas"
highway=pedestrian is also used to tag roads used exclusively for pedestrians (or nearly exclusively) in forests and other areas - not only in city centers. For an example see Aleja Wędrowników in Kraków (photoosm) I propose following description:
"For roads mainly / exclusively for pedestrians. Typical in shopping areas, town centers, places with tourism attractions and recreation/civic areas, where wide expanses of hard surface are provided for pedestrians to walk."
to replace current
"For town centres and civic areas, where wide expanses of hard surface are provided for pedestrians to walk (often between shops)."
- The definitions is good. But your new example picture of a cementary is problematic: Every cementary is pedestrian-only, these ways could probably not serve as a normal road. A wide footway through a cementary does not make a pedestrian zone imho. What distinguished the pedestrian ways from the footways on this cementary?--Jojo4u (talk) 16:34, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
- I agree with Jojo4u that the cemetery example is misleading, as it blurs the distinction between footway and a pedestrian zone/area in the town centre. The particular example depicted is probably a highway=service with appropriate access rights (access=private + foot=yes); typically on a cemetery this also functions as the driveway for maintenance and mourning vehicles. Otherwise, a wide footway is still a footway which can be given width=*. --Polarbear w (talk) 11:00, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
- As always it depends. There are big cemeteries where there is a clear distinction between main roads and smaller side paths or roads, and it would seem desirable to have some kind of hierarchy to represent the structure. The term "highway=pedestrian" is not requiring to be in an actual "pedestrian zone" (although it applies there as well, of course), it is mainly a distinction between smaller footways and larger, main pedestrian ways. Also, small footways within a pedestrian zone still are footways and not pedestrian highways. --Dieterdreist (talk) 10:05, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- "these ways could probably not serve as a normal road" - these ways would be able to be used as a normal road. In fact, this one from example is used as a service road for maintenance and is constructed like normal road. highway=pedestrian is still better than highway=service as it is primarily used by pedestrians. Also, an extremely wide footway is distinguishable from "road converted into pedestrian area" only by history Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:31, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
I'm not happy with the situation, as we are losing the distinction between the =footway and =pedestrian value. It seems we agree that
- the 1,50 m wide way on the picture above is =footway
- the previous city road that has been paved on level is =pedestrian
- the walkable area on a town square is =pedestrian
So, when does the =footway become =pedestrian? When its width grows over 3 m ? Do we have different usage patterns? Maybe on a footway the typical usage is more directional, going from one end to reach the other. On a pedestrian it is more random, strolling from one shop to the next on the other side? The original proposal did not focus on wide footways.--Polarbear w (talk) 22:35, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- "On a pedestrian it is more random, strolling from one shop to the next on the other side?" this one is clearly not fitting, on most pedestrianized roads people are for most part moving along the road. Maybe "When its width grows so it is road-sized"? I am not comfortable with that because there are cases where unreasonably large footways were made what does not make them highway=pedestrian or footway is wider for a small section. Maybe "heavily trafficked, is road-sized pedestrian way"? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 23:00, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Remove Signs (selection)
As far as I see these signs are about pedestrian zones. These are typically in the same area as highway=pedestrian, but
- there are highway=pedestrian without these signs
- sometimes these signs appear on highway=footway
- The minimum would be to keep one of the signs in the example cases on the main page. Would you have a case which is signposted as pedestrian zone but fails our criteria here? --Polarbear w (talk) 22:44, 2 November 2017 (UTC)