New Quest: What is the access at this gate/barrier?

[mcliquid]

General

Affected tag(s) to be modified/added: access or locked and/or gate:type Question asked: What is the access at this gate/barrier?

Abstract

I add a lot of barriers to OpenStreetMap when I see them in the aerial photography. These can be lift_gate's, gate's or other barriers. You can't see the access from the aerial photo, this would have to be done on site.

Here I would like to start a small collection of ideas, how exactly the filter could look like and which values make sense when.

The goal should be that one supplements the appropriate access at barriers, which can be closed for some transport modes in some kind. This helps routing software to decide depending on the means of transport whether this may pass through here.

Element selection:

nodes with barrier
and (
!access or !bicycle or !foot or !motor_vehicle
)

Metadata needed:

Proposed UI: A multi selection should be considered to select more than one access-value. Maybe also the recycling quest would be suitable, but with an major option for access=all.

What do you folks think about this?

[mnalis]

Maybe it would be simpler to just show existing Other answers / Add access... menu (which only exists on quests/overlays that reference ways currently) also on barrier-related node quests?

Although I personally usually just use SCEE to add access tags on ways that are behind barriers (e.g. access=private or motor_vehicle=customers or hgv=no); as it seems to me to be better supported in routers/renderers? But I see no harm in also allowing it on barrier=* nodes

[mcliquid]

Maybe it would be simpler to just show existing Other answers / Add access... menu (which only exists on quests/overlays that reference ways currently) also on barrier-related node quests?

I haven't even thought of that, but that could work.

add access tags on ways that are behind barriers

One random example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10649072530 All the service ways named "Widum" and the path between Schillerstraße and Schmiedgasse are publicly accessible. The gate is locked / private but the access is not mapped yet.

It would be wrong to map a access to any of the ways because there is no restriction - only the gate is closed.

GraphHopper and OSMR are routing through the gate (bicycle profile), Valhalla will use the de-tour over the Schmiedgasse. In the walking-profile all three routers pass the gate which will not work.

Would it make sense to display a Quest icon (e.g. with a key) for all lockable barriers (gate, lift_gate, bump_gate, sliding_gate) and then display the existing access popup?

[Helium314]

I can't really help on the tagging part, but simply showing the access dialog might not be great. Most of the values will not be used for the gate / other barrier, and time-based restrictions possibly apply to all access tags (also, will they use opening_hours or conditional restrictions?). Probably we should first have some idea which access tags / values need to be used.

It might be possible to allow selection of a way, so access tags are also added to that way. But that's not going to be a simple thing...

[mnalis]

One random example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10649072530

I must admit that the purpose of that one has me puzzled, but I think I can see what you are trying to demonstrate (e.g. residential road might be public from both sides, but have barrier at middle or entry/end in order to dissuade cars from using it as a shortcut for transit, while still allowing them to reach places from either side if that is their intended destination)

Would it make sense to display a Quest icon (e.g. with a key) for all lockable barriers (gate, lift_gate, bump_gate, sliding_gate) and then display the existing access popup?

If you enabled POI: Traffic quest, barriers should be shown there I think (and then, if Add access... menu was enabled for them, you could add access restrictions -- or click show/edit tags in expert mode and add them manually which works already if you know the raw tags by heart).

But why only gate, lift_gate, bump_gate, sliding_gate? Bollards and others (cycle barriers...) could be (re)moveable too.

E.g. I've seen it quite often that barrier=bollard + bollard=foldable + motor_vehicle=private + bicycle=yes + foot=yes to prevent non-resident cars from using a residential road as a transit shortcut and making noise all the time. Or barrier=bollard + bollard=rising + motor_vehicle=customers + motor_vehicle:conditional = no @ (22:00-08:00) to prevent entrance during night etc. overpass

And adding legal access rights have uses even if barriers are unremovable and unlockable (indeed, there might be signed access restrictions even on barrier=entrance which does not have any technical means to prevent passage of people/vehicles)

[mcliquid]

I've thought about this a bit more and am considering whether a locked=yes/no would be sufficient for the first step. The question would then be "Is this gate locked?". This should at least clarify the question of whether the gate can be used in general or not. What do you think?

[mnalis]

I've thought about this a bit more and am considering whether a locked=yes/no would be sufficient for the first step.

Makes sense to me, that certainly should be much less problematic! I'd probably change text to "Is this gate (usually) locked?" to sync it with its wiki definition, though.