# Walkability Compass--A Space Syntax Solution for Comparative Studies
## 4 Discussion  
This study undertakes walkability using the mathematical graph and space syntax method. The research output is the walkability compass setting of the city walkability strengths and weaknesses. In addition, the study explains the walkability pattern typology as well. The proposed research method has been tested on the example of several cities, so the comparison results allow us to identify significantly common traits (e.g., common walkability patterns) and differences. The \"compass\" and spatial patterns make the framework suitable for comparative purposes. A WebGIS solution is used to disseminate the results to enhance the comparison. Both results were achieved with limitations, primarily due to pulling only the street network geometry out of vast walkability factors, and secondly due to space syntax tools itself simplifications (e.g., the urban feature geometry simplification). Both of the above aspects are discussed below. The Space Syntax was chosen for several reasons: as a spatial model, it focussed on the reflection of self-organising forces of complex urban networks. The Space Syntax model is constantly developed by a scientific community and reacting to discovered weaknesses. For example, the criticised axial analysis [71] has been updated to segment analysis [57] and applied in this case study. The approach uses street segments instead of crossroads (criticised approach) for graph construction [72]. The above-described approach is also seen as more walkability analysis-oriented because the space syntax graph focuses on street segments, which during the last stage of the research was continued with a more detailed focus on buildings. The walkability compass emphasises the phenomenon's cultural and visual aspects and utilises Re and St metrics to measure it. Assigning visual issues to the metrics results from urban studies literature. For example, [PERSON] points out the importance of public spaces created beside a building for street culture and liability of a street by describing the following patterns: Public Outdoor Room (pattern 69), Common Areas at the Heart (129), Seat Spots (241), Activity Pockets (124), Building Edge (160), and Outdoor Room (163) [73]. The concept of placemaking, when it is focussed on the access and linkage of physical public spaces, identify an essential aspect of placemaking as proximity, connectivity, walkability, convenience and accessibility and suggest the following quite general indicators of the features mentioned above: mode split, transit use, pedestrian activity, and parking usage patterns [74]. On the other hand, the proposed indexes of gravity, reach, and straightness could be seen as clear and measurable alternatives at least to part of the placemaking aspects and indicators as reach and straightness for pedestrian activity, transit-oriented development, proximity, connectivity. Furthermore, \"The city in its complete sense is a geographic plexus, an economic organisation, an institutional process, a theatre of social action, and an aesthetic symbol of collective unity.\" [75]. So-called \"New Traditionalists\" such as [PERSON], [PERSON], and [PERSON] seek to return urban living arrangements to human-scale communities that are pedestrian-oriented [76]. Based on [PERSON]'s [12; 56; 77] study, it could be concluded that the more accessible the building perimeter from the street as a simple quantitative indicator, the higher probability of its attractiveness for walkers. [PERSON]'s [78] concept of humans perceiving a city as \"space by space\" make a theoretical base regarding the St metrics. The viewspace in which the observer is now is called \"here\", while the space to which there is a possibility to move is \"there\". \"Here\" is always known, but \"there\" could be either known or unknown depending on spatial relation between spaces, e.g., if \"there\" space is located behind the corner, then it is unknown, if it is at least partially visible--known.