Redundant "tactile paving" quest being asked - both on kerbs and on highway=crossing node

[mnalis]

Use case

At some crossings (encountered it multiple times), user is being asked about tactile_paving on each side of the crossing individually, and then again "if there is tactile paving on both sides". It is confusing and seems redundant.

Example this location: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2894360

small_SVID_20211013_180906_1.mp4

Proposed Solution

• ideally, user would be asked just one question - if there is tactile_paving on both sides, and if there is, two additional individual questions if it exists on each side individually would be skipped (that is, they would automatically solved by that one quest).
• alternatively, if the user is asked for each of the sides if it has tactile paving, asking them again "if it exists on both sides" is redundant and confusing, so it should be removed.

(this was logged on SC 36.0-beta2 based my fork, but no changes related to that issues should be in there)

[westnordost]

Well, two are for the kerbs, one is for the crossing.

And the wording reflects that:

• Is there tactile paving on this curb here?
• Does this crosswalk have tactile pavings on both sides?

So there is nothing wrong with the questions as such. Yeah, maybe it would be "nice" if the other things then get solved automatically or something, but such complexity is not really worth to implement.

So, if the translation into Croatian is also OK, the only thing that may be considered is to:

Not display the tactile-paving crossing quest if the way the highway=crossing is part of also contains a node that has barrier=kerb tagged OR any other node in that way would be a candidate for an (implicit) kerb (i.e. common vertex of a footway=crossing and footway=sidewalk that meet or of a barrier=kerb line) - in other words, if a quest is displayed for the kerbs.

...

Okay, I wrote the above to show a possible enhancement and float a suggestion whether it is worth it to implement the additional complexity. Now, having written what would be necessary to implement, it already makes me sick in the stomach. This is simply not worth the time and complexity to avoid asking kind of duplicate questions.

Also, in general duplicate (asking and) tagging like this is not that bad IMO - inconsistencies can be found automatically and some applications may only know how to process one of the two infos, one being a property of a crossing (may be easily used by applications to highlight blind-friendly intersections) and one being a property of kerb (probably used by routers additionally to the information on the crossing)

[smichel17]

Okay, just to clarify, in a situation like the image below, where there are lowered curbs on both sides, both with tactile pavings, I've currently been tagging yes to both curbs AND yes to the crossing. Now I'm wondering if I should be tagging no to the crossing, because it is already tagged on the curbs.

edit: made sidewalks light gray instead of also black

[westnordost]

Now I'm wondering if I should be tagging no to the crossing

No. The question is very clear. "Does this crosswalk have tactile pavings on both sides?"

[smichel17]

The confusion was not about on both sides. It was about, "Does this crosswalk have tactile pavings…?"

After reading your comment, I wondered if I should interpret it as, "Are there tactile pavings which belong to this crosswalk?"
I thought, "maybe if the tactile pavings belong to the curb, then it does not belong to the sidewalk."

Regardless, this confusion was caused by the comments here, not caused by the app, so it is not a problem, I think.

[andrewharvey]

@smichel17 It might be helpful to think about it from the OSM perspective, there are two curb nodes, and one crossing object, so the quest is asking to complete the tactile paving information on these different objects.

If you answer yes to tactile paving on the crossing, then both curbs must be answered as yes. If you answer no to tactile paving on the crossing then you can't then tag both curbs as yes. So the quests are asking about the same thing, but just to be saved on different OSM objects.

[pkoby]

Clarification question:
When asked if a crossing has tactile paving on "both sides", does this mean on each end (where the kerbs are), or along the crossing way (where the zebra stripes or whatever are)?

As I understand https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tactile_paving#Use_on_ways, tactile_paving on a way means it's along the whole way. On a node, it means it's in a small point area.

So tagging tactile_paving on a highway=crossing node suggests to me that it would apply to the crossing itself, not the ends (kerbs), but that doesn't seem to be how many people interpret this, nor how the wiki suggests it should be used.

[westnordost]

On each side

[Nadyita]

If the kerb is identical on both sides of a crossing and the location of the actual kerbs is not clear (e.g., due to a lack of high resolution imagery), kerb=* is sometimes added to the highway=crossing node instead.

The same logic pretty much applies to tactile pavings, because they are made to warn about the kerb. You either put them on the nodes where they are, or on the crossing, if the location is unclear. Not both. I get that it's going to be hard to implement, but it would be more than worth it.

[endolith]

No. The question is very clear. "Does this crosswalk have tactile pavings on both sides?"

Meaning that both ramps at the ends of the crosswalk have tactile paving, right? Or literally that there is a band of tactile paving along both sides of the crosswalk way itself?

[matkoniecz]

Meaning that both ramps at the ends of the crosswalk have tactile paving, right?

yes

[pkoby]

I think it's wrong/inaccurate/confusing/ambiguous to tag a node with tactile_paving=*. As you can see here, it's not clear to everyone. It's probably way too late to change it now, but I don't think I would be comfortable assuming that all nodes tagged with tactile_paving refer to the kerb ends and not the way.

Assuming that the quest remains as is, can we simply change the wording to "Does this crosswalk have tactile pavings on both ends" to disambiguate it? And maybe only ask it if it's not shared by a crossing way?

[endolith]

It should definitely have a diagram, as in #3407 (comment)

There are also crosswalks with a strip of tactile paving along the way: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tactile_paving#Use_on_ways

[Nadyita]

The tactile pavings at the ends of a crosswalk are not because of the crosswalk, but because of the flush kerbs. The kerbs for a crosswalk would be completely along the crosswalk and belong to a way. If the crosswalk is mapped as a node, though, you will never know whether this refers to the crosswalk, or the flushed kerbs. 😢

[westnordost]

you will never know whether this refers to the crosswalk, or the flushed kerbs. 😢

It refers to the kerbs simply because that a crosswalk has tactile paving all the way is extremely rare when compared to the former and hence it follows that tactile_paving=yes must also mean the former.

This means that if one wants to clearly distinguish the former with the latter, another (tbd) (sub)tag would need to be invented.