<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/1/15 12:13 PM, Harald Kliems
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CACwR0F903Ru9U6T=Z50sV6xN-Be2X7EK7HSxuU=VZj-u0fVWJQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Context-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
Graphhopper doesn't have the problem. It could be that other
routers are using outdated data that did indeed have a tagging
problem.<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=47.811656%2C-122.379627&point=47.809696%2C-122.528286&layer=Lyrk">https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=47.811656%2C-122.379627&point=47.809696%2C-122.528286&layer=Lyrk</a></div>
<br>
</blockquote>
in the long run, we should consider whether there should<br>
be tagging extensions to cover access routes that should be<br>
routed, or perhaps a more nuanced approach to access roads<br>
from routers.<br>
<br>
i have a couple of recent cases where OSM based routing has<br>
produced bad results because of these sorts of issues; some<br>
require tagging extensions and others might be addressed<br>
by adding specific criteria to routers as to when service roads<br>
are permissible (e.g. ferry approaches or at route endpoints)<br>
<br>
richard<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:rwelty@averillpark.net">rwelty@averillpark.net</a>
Averill Park Networking - GIS & IT Consulting
OpenStreetMap - PostgreSQL - Linux
Java - Web Applications - Search</pre>
</body>
</html>