[Tagging] Navaid relation?

[Florian Lohoff]

On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 09:43:31AM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> > Can you give example of residential building with fully mapped roads, footways
> > and obstacles where well written router will fail?
> 
> - Baumstraße 43a, Gütersloh, Germany
> 	It does not have a connection to Baumstraße but to
> 	Hermann-Vogelsang-Straße.
> 
> 	It still will be routed through Baumstraße and the driveway to
> 	Baumstraße 45a
> 
> 	IMHO unfixable without bending geometry 
> 
> - Dalbker Straße 40a, Oerlinghausen, Germany 
>   Dalbker Straße 44a, Oerlinghausen, Germany 
> 	Both fixed by moving the Address to a node, moving it further to
> 	Dalkbker Straße within the outline of the Building.
> 
> 	Otherwise you'd be routed to Buchweizenweg without access to
> 	the Building. This is what multiple of my collegues complained
>         about.
> 
> 	Here i bend geometry until it halfway worked.
> 
> Just 2 examples for the last 10 days or so. And footways wont help
> you in a car profile. You could bring a footway directly connecting
> the entrance to the Street.

And most likely - Try and schools in your area. If its correctly
mapped with the school ground as an amenity=school and buildings
etc.

Try to reach it by car:

	Elly-Heuss-Knapp Realschule, Gütersloh

You'll end on the wrong street without parking and a gate although
the school has a parking lot. And you even end up in a oneway hell.

Whenever you try to reach "large" osm objects on the routable network
you are in deep trouble. camp sites, airports, golf courses, schools.
People move the attributes from the polygons to nodes to make it
explicit where to navigate. With polygons its up to the algorithm
to guess the right point.

And i had tons of stuff like this the last decade. 2 Years ago
i ended up on a road at a river (by bike) the campsite on the opposite
side of the river. 5km to next bridge to cross the river because the
road 20m on the other river side was the nearest point on the routable
network. Roads on the campsite were access=private. 

I ended here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=53.92106&mlon=12.10538#map=17/53.92106/12.10538

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff                                                 f at zz.de
        UTF-8 Test: The 🐈 ran after a 🐁, but the 🐁 ran away
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190522/94c0b926/attachment.sig>