Ossian Lore (2021-01-21 01:23:52+00:00): Hi Vinas, thanks for the detailed response, some good points there. Totally agree that there are situations where mapping a pavement as a separate feature to the road is necessary, but the way you are mapping pavements in Glasgow suggests that they are entirely separate features to the roads they bound and that are in some way physically segregated from the carriageway, which, as beautifully as you have drawn them, is not representative of the reality on the ground. The primary motivation behind edits to the map should be to represent the reality on the ground in an accurate and meaningful way, how aesthetically pleasing the map looks is entirely secondary to that. I understand where you are coming from, and although I think it would be more useful to map roads, etc, as area outlines rather than linear features, OpenStreetMap is a system that works using lines and nodes. So unless a pavement is segregated from it's carriageway in some meaningful way by physical barrier (e.g. a significant difference in level it's detail should be captured using the appropriate fields in the menu of that section of road.

I'm going to list your examples now, but just for ease of response :)

*Staircases & elevated entrances - this info can be captured using the drop-downs and additional tagging fields on the node indicating the Entrance/Exit to the building so that you don't need to connect every building entrance to the road with a separate path.

*Pedestrian crossings at complex junctions - again this can be captured by creating a Crossing node on the road and utilising the tags, where a crossing is staged with a median island between two separate carriageways I always map that with a small section of footpath but do not map the pavement beyond.

*Sight-impaired navigation - it's awesome that you're even considering that :) As mentioned, OSM is a system of lines and nodes, so as long as roads, buildings and barriers are all mapped accurately and the relevant information is recorded on the lines and nodes navigation will work as well as it was designed to.*Glasgow mapping guidelines - great suggestion! and a discussion I'd be happy to be part of, though I'm not personally familiar with any other Glasgow based mappers. I think following the example already set in Edinburgh is a good rule of thumb

*Railings/crash barriers/pedestrian cages - I don't have any issue with mapping these barriers, but I wouldn't map the pavement separately because of their presence alone. It's the whole lines and nodes thing again, OSM isn't measuring the distance from the centre of the road to the centre of each pavement so doesn't care about the presence of that railing along the kerb when it's giving a pedestrian directions, it's merely looking at the info recorded on the linear feature of the road and any nodes with properties on it. A building doesn't have to be connected to a road for OSM to 'know' where it is and give you directions to it, OSM would simply direct you to the point nearest to the building (entrance, if it has once recorded) on the road nearest to the building

*Junction geometry - I touched on this above with the median island but looking at your specific examples:
-Kelvin Drive, you have created a fence to indicate the presence of the median island between the two branches of Kelvin Drive here, this fence doesn't exist though, does it? I can see why you wanted to add a footpath here as the junction is (overall) very wide, but it hasn't added anything that couldn't have been recorded using the the details on Queen Margaret Drive
-Kelvinside Avenue, the only path that I would map as a separate feature here is this one, with it connecting to Queen Margaret Drive and Kelvinside Ave https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/859078401