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

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Wed Jan 31 20:47:46 UTC 2018

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
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20180201/6094dc60/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Talk-au mailing list