[OSM-talk] Fwd: Nav4All navigation shut down by Navteq
richard.mann.westoxford at googlemail.com
Wed Feb 3 11:29:53 GMT 2010
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 5:36 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
<dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> ...routers would lead pedestrians in areas where they are not allowed to
> walk (cycleways).
Nonsense. There'll be a footway alongside that they can use (99.999%
of the time).
If you want to micro-map a footway as well, and put foot=no on the
cycleway, feel free.
But unless you've micro-mapped the footway, you should *not* be adding
foot=no explicitly or implicitly, unless there really is no route. And
the simplest way to show that it has been micromapped is to put an
explicit foot=no on the cycleway when you've done it.
I can see why this sort of nonsense would put a commercial router off
- it may not affect their current service, but it doesn't exactly
inspire confidence, does it?
More information about the talk