[GraphHopper] access=no

[Nop]

Hi!

Access values are a secondary tag. In OSM an access value is not used on 
its own on a node. The node represents some sort of barrier and the 
access tags show which modes of travel cann pass this barrier and which 
cannot.

The type of barrier also needs to be evaluated before the access tags - 
it may already allow certain vehicles and rule out others. E.g. a 
bollard is always passable on foot and by bicycle.

I would consider a lone access tag on a node meaningless.


bye
                     Nop


Am 22.01.2015 18:59, schrieb Laurent Bendel:
> Hi Peter,
> right, I was looking at the wrong place. Naively, I would think that ANY
> node of any way that has access=no would disqualify the way, would it
> take too much processing to take in account all nodes and not just a few
> select ones ?
>
> Laurent
>
> PS: I’ll go ahead and just add a barrier=gate on those places anyway, it
> won’t hurt
>
> On 22 janv. 2015, at 14:58, Peter <graphhopper at gmx.de
> <mailto:graphhopper at gmx.de>> wrote:
>
>> Hi Laurent,
>>
>> barriers are handled but the border_control is not yet included in the
>> potentialBarriers list. Please create an issue to fix this. Best would
>> be to let me know some more candidates ;)
>>
>> Here is the code for cars:
>> https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/blob/master/core/src/main/java/com/graphhopper/routing/util/CarFlagEncoder.java#L76
>>
>> Regards,
>> Peter
>>
>> On 22.01.2015 11:58, Laurent Bendel wrote:
>>> Ok. The reason I’m asking, is that I modified a node on
>>> Openstreetmap, flagging it with: access=no, but the routing algorithm
>>> still shows a route going « through » this node. After a quick look
>>> at the code (what I could figure out), I thought that the algorithm
>>> would take in account those cases, but obviously not. What should be
>>> the tagging to force the routing to avoid a road that is closed at
>>> some point ?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Laurent
>>>
>>> PS: the node in question is here:
>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3272543050
>>>
>>> On 21 janv. 2015, at 15:48, Peter <graphhopper at gmx.de
>>> <mailto:graphhopper at gmx.de>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Laurent,
>>>>
>>>> we update the OSM data roughly every day.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>> On 21.01.2015 15:44, Laurent Bendel wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> how often does the server at https://graphhopper.com/maps/ takes
>>>>> OSM updates from the central repository and recreates its graph ?
>>>>> because I’ve made some changes in OSM that I don’t see reflected in
>>>>> the results, so I’m wondering if it’s a problem of algorithm or
>>>>> just because it’s not updated yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> Laurent
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> GraphHopper mailing list
>>>>> GraphHopper at openstreetmap.org <mailto:GraphHopper at openstreetmap.org>
>>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> GraphHopper mailing list
>>>> GraphHopper at openstreetmap.org <mailto:GraphHopper at openstreetmap.org>
>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GraphHopper mailing list
>>> GraphHopper at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GraphHopper mailing list
>> GraphHopper at openstreetmap.org <mailto:GraphHopper at openstreetmap.org>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> GraphHopper mailing list
> GraphHopper at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper
>


---
Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft.
http://www.avast.com