[Indoor] Indoor Routing Observations

[Antoine Riche]

Hi Volker.

You're right it's better to separate the tags for the physical 
description and the usage. I do like the idea of an indoor=counter that 
might be a node or a way on an indoor=room. This works well both for 
rendering and routing.

Antoine.

Le 07/03/2024 à 17:52, Volker Krause via indoor a écrit :
> Thanks Antoine, I suspected you had faced all of this already :)
>
> For the implicit walls I agree with your conclusion, and we also came to the
> same result in the discussion in yesterday's meeting:
>
> - assume indoor=corridor has no implicit walls, ie. routing-wise it's the same
> as indoor=area.
> - fix TU Dresden (and other affected buildings using indoor=corridor for fully
> walled corridors with mapped doors) by using indoor=room + room=corridor
> instead.
> - add explicit outer building walls where needed (tagged as indoor=wall).
>
>
> Regarding counters/reception desks I didn't know about the reception desk
> proposals yet. It would seem like something useful to have when mapping e.g.
> hotels or event venues. It's a bit orthogonal to tagging counters though I
> think, one describes physical structure the other one semantics (which might
> apply to a room, a counter, a desk, an area, etc). So I guess we want both?
>
> Example 1:
> a way tagged as indoor=room + amenity=fast_food with one edge tagged as
> indoor=counter
>
> Example 2:
> a way or node tagged as amenity=reception + indoor=counter within an
> indoor=area hotel lobby
>
> Technically this isn't indoor-specific, but I'm not sure if there's a better
> tag than indoor for this?
>
> Regards,
> Volker
>
> On Dienstag, 5. März 2024 15:36:51 CET Antoine Riche via indoor wrote:
>> Hi Volker.
>>
>> Thanks for raising these interesting questions. We actually faced these
>> issues when mapping Paris railway stations. Here are my two pennies.
>>
>>   > Implicit corridor walls
>>
>> Actually https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:indoor%3Dcorridor
>> defines indoor=corridor as a "passageway space without walls". This
>> seems a little bit contradictory with "Enclosed walkway area" as
>> described in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_Indoor_Tagging,
>> however I'm not so sure that "enclosed" should be understood as closed
>> by walls on all sides here.
>>
>> Considering that indoor=corridor have implicit walls would imply to use
>> indoor=area for areas that really feel like corridors though they do not
>> have a door at ends. Mapping corridor walls explicitly offers more
>> flexibility, and they are not required anywhere the corridor is adjacent
>> to an idoor=room.
>>
>>   > (Implicit) Outer building walls
>>
>> Again not considering walls are implicit offer more flexibility. I can
>> think of a railway station building
>> (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30174513) adjacent to a corridor
>> (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/643954662) that runs below the rails
>> and platforms. There is no door between the building and the corridor,
>> considering implicit walls on the building outline would not work here.
>>
>>   > Service counters
>>
>> The tag amenity=reception_desk is in use.
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aamenity%3Dreception_desk
>> explains that the proposal was rejected several times, mostly due to the
>> name of the tag. Counter sounds like a better name. Also the definition
>> as "the location of a receptionist
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/receptionist> who is employed by an
>> organization to receive or greet any visitors, patients, or clients" is
>> perhaps a bit restrictive, this could be widened to any location where a
>> person can make a request to a professionnal.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Antoine.
>>
>> Le 26/02/2024 à 18:01, Volker Krause via indoor a écrit :
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I've been working on indoor routing recently and hit a few challenges. We
>>> discussed those at the Hack Weekend in Karlsruhe as well, but there isn't
>>> really an elegant solution for any of the following yet:
>>>
>>>
>>> # Implicit corridor walls
>>>
>>> indoor=corridor and indoor=room are defined to have implicit walls, unlike
>>> e.g. indoor=area (seehttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/
>>> Simple_Indoor_Tagging#Modelling_the_different_indoor_elements).
>>>
>>> However the predominant use of indoor=corridor isn't really in line with
>>> that.
>>>
>>> Example 1:https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3845325
>>>
>>> This is entirely open to the north end leading into the main hall, closed
>>> on the south (with multiple doors) and on the sides it's either walls,
>>> adjacent shops (also see service counters below) or ways up to the
>>> platforms.
>>>
>>> By the strict SIT interpretation neither the main hall nor the platforms
>>> nor the shop service counters would be accessible.
>>>
>>> Example 2:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/453091694
>>>
>>> Open on short-edge ends, intuitively a "corridor", but by strict SIT
>>> interpretation all connections to staircases or adjacent halls would be
>>> closed.
>>>
>>> Example 3:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/870541411
>>>
>>> This strictly follows SIT. All edges of the corridor either have doors or
>>> are actually walled (adjacent to rooms or the outer building wall).
>>>
>>>
>>> For rendering this is mostly subtle, however for routing this is very
>>> problematic. With strict SIT interpretation many train stations are
>>> practically inaccessible. And when not using implicit walls you end up
>>> with
>>> routes through the building walls in example 3 (due to the next point).
>>>
>>>
>>> # (Implicit) Outer building walls
>>>
>>> indoor=area has no implicit walls but can occur with one or more edges
>>> aligned to an outer building wall.
>>>
>>> Example 1:https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6038767
>>>
>>> There are walls where this area aligns with the building outline on the
>>> north and south sides, ie. routing through those edges should not be
>>> possible (apart from the doors).
>>>
>>> Example 2:https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11878686
>>>
>>> Same situation here. However the building outline (https://
>>> www.openstreetmap.org/way/23290301) does not match the actual outer
>>> building walls on the ground floor here, with the parking spaces on
>>> https:// www.openstreetmap.org/way/27743604X  being on the outside and
>>> the building only extending to the full outline on higher levels.
>>>
>>> Example 3:https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10142437
>>>
>>> Here the area is open towards the outside. Assuming there's an implicit
>>> wall on the building outline would make this inaccessible for routing.
>>>
>>>
>>> For rendering this again is relatively subtle, but for routing that's a
>>> crucial difference.
>>>
>>>
>>> # Service counters
>>>
>>> Less severe, but also occurring in many train stations is the fact that
>>> amenities are often tagged as indoor=room (and thus implicitly walled) but
>>> without any tagged doors, making it impossible to route into them. In many
>>> cases the fix here is adding the missing doors. However there are also
>>> amenities (bakeries, fast food stands, etc) that serve over a counter on
>>> an
>>> edge of the room polygon and don't actually allow you to enter. That
>>> counter is where routing should lead you to ideally, but how can that be
>>> tagged?
>>>
>>> Example:https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/402790810
>>>
>>> Free-standing room, service counter at the north-facing edge.
>>>
>>>
>>> Any thoughts on how to deal with those issues?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Volker
>>>
>>> PS: Please remember the quarterly OSM Indoor online meetup on March 6th
>>> 18:00 CET athttps://osmvideo.cloud68.co/user/tob-2uf-drl-eal!
>