I’ve been mapping crosswalk corners using a single point for the curb (lowered or otherwise) on a small spur connecting the sidewalk to the crossing way, trying to balance: - One entity per feature (not duplicating the curb) - Not blocking the sidewalk routing (on the sidewalk, you don’t need to cross the curb to turn the corner) - Not blocking the crossing routing (if you cross one edge, then the next edge, you don’t necessarily need to stop at the curb unless the intersection has signals)

When I update an intersection that has the two sidewalk ways and two crosswalk ways meeting at a single curb point, or sidewalks crossing and connecting two separate curb points to the crossings (except where there actually are two curbs), I’ve been reworking the ways to match this structure.

The latest Pedestrian Working Group/Guide suggests a slightly different approach (examples at that link):

• Use a single point for the kerb where it meets the road.
• Only use a second curb POI if there are two distinct curb features.
• Use a spur connecting the curb to the two branches of sidewalk.
• Allow the crossing ways to meet at the curb point.

It makes sense, and it’s cleaner than the way I’ve been trying to put the curb in the middle of that stub (and more accurate in that the kerb isn’t in the middle of the sidewalk), so going forward I’ll use that scheme instead.

Unfortunately I can’t just turn off the “Barrier blocking highway” rule in Osmose, because it’s still needed to find places where the sidewalks meet incorrectly at the curb. :shrug: