Hello ratrun
I can understand the usage of a small amount of flags however I would have thought logic more akin to the following. This would only highlight something as a cycleway if it is intentionally marked as such rather than merely having a right of way.
Edited in the email so apologies for any formatting issues.
if (way.hasTag("bicycle", intendedValues))
{
if(isPushingSection)
wayType = WayType.OTHER_SMALL_WAY
else if (“cycleway”.equals(highway))
wayType = WayType.CYCLEWAY;
else if (way.hasTag(“bicycle”,”designated)
wayType = WayType.CYCLEWAY;
else if (roadValues.contains(highway))
wayType = WayType.ROAD;
Any thoughts?
Sincerely
Stuart Adam
On 2 Jun 2015, at 16:10, ratrun <ratrun at gmx.at> wrote:
> Hello Stuart,
>
> the waytype information is just used for the routing instructions such that a cycle rider gets a better idea what kind of way to look at. As the bits are limited and a more exact infomration is superflous for that purpose, I intentionally mangled all kind of ways somehow marked for bicycle usage together into "CYCLEWAY".
>
> I also had some code which produced a statistic of the tour. It calcualted the distances per each paved and unpaved waytype. This code didn't make it into the master, although I think that it is an important feature for bicycle routing. The problem was that the code was too bicycle specific and required changes in all other flag encoders as well - see issue #209.
>
> ratrun
>
> Am 02.06.2015 um 16:17 schrieb Stuart Adam:
>> Hello all
>>
>> I am starting to look at bike routing and I note in the handleBikeRelated method in BikeCommonFlagEncoder the following logic applies.
>>
>> if (way.hasTag("bicycle", intendedValues))
>> {
>> if (isPusingSection && !way.hasTag("bicycle", "designated"))
>> wayType = WayType.OTHER_SMALL_WAY;
>> else
>> wayType = WayType.CYCLEWAY;
>> } else if ("cycleway".equals(highway))
>> wayType = WayType.CYCLEWAY;
>> else if (roadValues.contains(highway))
>> wayType = WayType.ROAD;
>>
>>
>> This does not seem correct to me as from my understanding this is taking the fact that a way has been marked as having a right of way for bicycles (but not a pushing section) then it is a full blown cyclepath. In my mind at least cycleway implies dedicated and marked (normally with differently coloured tarmac) sections which is a much stronger indication for cycle use than just a bicycle right of way.
>>
>>
>> Am I correct and if so should this be changed or was there a reason for this decision in Graphhopper.
>>
>> Sincerely
>> Stuart Adam
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GraphHopper mailing list
>> GraphHopper at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper
>
> _______________________________________________
> GraphHopper mailing list
> GraphHopper at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/graphhopper/attachments/20150602/eb3d32a3/attachment.html>