[talk-au] Routing through a park that doesn't have actual paths

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Thu Feb 1 05:18:52 UTC 2018


On 01-Feb-18 03:35 PM, Jonathon Rossi wrote:
> > Exists for areas of concrete too
> Yes true, including car parks which usually don't have footpaths.
>
> > I think if you tag an area as pedestrian, or as steps .. routes will 
> not go across them.
> Did you mean to say will or will not go across them?

Will NOT go across them. Someone suggest that they may use the way 
itself for routing - so goes around the outside .. that would be helpful 
at least.
> And how would you tag an area as "pedestrian"?
Create a closed way (that is an area), then tag it with

highway=pedestrian
area=yes  (this last should not be required ... but belt and braces 
approach)

Refer Way: 354759945
For steps refer Relation: 4645750

>
> Sounds like the general consensus is that routing is "broken" and we 
> continue mapping as you'd expect, and there are no real good workarounds.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 6:48 AM Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com 
> <mailto:61sundowner at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     A 'well known' routing problem.
>
>     Exists for areas of concrete too ... I think if you tag an area as
>     pedestrian, or as steps .. routes will not go across them.
>     For an area of steps the bottom, top and sides can have ways that
>     are paths ... that gets around the routing issue.
>     In the longer term routes should solve the problem .. they don't
>     see it as an urgent issue as there are not many people using
>     pedestrian routing.
>
>
>     On 01-Feb-18 01:45 AM, Jonathon Rossi wrote:
>>     It appears that this is a long standing enhancement request for
>>     GraphHopper:
>>     https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/issues/82
>>
>>     On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 12:17 AM Jonathon Rossi
>>     <jono at jonorossi.com <mailto:jono at jonorossi.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         To clarify, both Google Maps and Strava routing can't do this
>>         either, I was trying to work out if OSM could do this.
>>
>>         On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 12:10 AM Jonathon Rossi
>>         <jono at jonorossi.com <mailto:jono at jonorossi.com>> wrote:
>>
>>             In the past I've mapped exactly what I've surveyed on the
>>             ground in local parks, however I've recently been using
>>             the OSM routing feature rather than from other services
>>             and I've discovered it can't route directly across a park
>>             that is just grass.
>>
>>             In the following example, I've mapped:
>>             - the short grass track (eastern side) that council are
>>             likely inadvertently making each time they bring vehicles
>>             through the gate to mow the park (the rest of the park
>>             boundary has timber bollards),
>>             - trails that lead from the Greater Glider Conservation
>>             Area out into the park, the small bit of the "Trail
>>             Circuit" in the park isn't actually a well defined path
>>             it just opens up but it isn't grass and the amount of
>>             trees keep it path like
>>             - other well formed paths that lead out to roads
>>
>>             https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=-27.54259%2C153.22173%3B-27.54227%2C153.21904#map=18/-27.54200/153.22056
>>
>>
>>             The OSM Wiki states:
>>
>>             > Ways (highway=path or highway=footway) leading into a
>>             park from a road, should always be connected to the road
>>             for routing purposes. It's debatable whether they should
>>             connect to the park area with a shared node, or cross
>>             over the polygon without connecting. TODO discuss
>>             > (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=park)
>>
>>             If a park is just a big grass area (with maybe a few
>>             obstacles like a playground) then it feels like the
>>             responsibility of the routing engine to just do this
>>             (maybe with an access tag to say it is okay to do so). It
>>             feels wrong for us mappers to map a "grass" path through
>>             the park from each entrance that we feel is a main
>>             thoroughfare.
>>
>>             Am I missing something, have others "fixed" this problem
>>             elsewhere?
>>
>>             Jono
>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Talk-au mailing list
>>     Talk-au at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-au at openstreetmap.org>
>>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Talk-au mailing list
>     Talk-au at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-au at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20180201/63a4e6f5/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Talk-au mailing list