[OSM-talk] Removing redundant routing instructions

Marc Gemis marc.gemis at gmail.com
Mon Apr 27 14:25:57 UTC 2015


I should have written "then there is no need" (with "then" when there is a
name or ref that stays the same)
in the other cases you need a relation.

On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 4:18 PM, <phil at trigpoint.me.uk> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon Apr 27 15:07:45 2015 GMT+0100, Marc Gemis wrote:
> > As long as the name (or the ref/int_ref) of the street remains the same,
> I
> > think the router should be able to give other messages than "turn right".
> > There is no need for an additional relation IMHO.
> >
> There is often no ref, or name. If there is a name it will often change.
>
> Phil (trigpoint )
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 12:06 PM, Lester Caine <lester at lsces.co.uk>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On 27/04/15 10:45, phil at trigpoint.me.uk wrote:
> > > >> == Question ==
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Could we benefit from a new route relation? For example a
> > > "route_continues"
> > > >> > relation? Would others find this useful?
> > > >> >
> > > > And more importantly, if you need to turn off onto the minor road
> going
> > > straight ahead it remains 'silent'.
> > > > I have occasionally used a through_route relation in these cases, but
> > > lack of support from routers does make it seem futile.
> > > > Much like the via way relation,  that one is so needed too.
> > >
> > > Why do I find that confusing?
> > >
> > > Currently in general the directions ignore corners even if there are
> > > roads going off those corners. The complaint is about 'extra'
> directions
> > > where the corner is actually the main road and the straight on branch
> is
> > > the turning. If the directions remain silent one would in some
> > > conditions get confused so the safe thing to do is announce both?
> > >
> > > The correct wording of the the directions should be perhaps 'road bares
> > > right' and 'go straight on' rather than 'turn right' but that does need
> > > the perhaps missing "through_route" information? As I said, the
> > > inclusion of road names in OSMAND while useful at times does get
> > > similarly annoying when a 'continue on Axxx' would suffice. In this
> case
> > > the road id provides the "through_route" information ... one remains on
> > > the same road ... and the straight on road has a different one which
> may
> > > just be 'minor road'.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Lester Caine - G8HFL
> > > -----------------------------
> > > Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
> > > L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
> > > EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
> > > Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
> > > Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > talk mailing list
> > > talk at openstreetmap.org
> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> > >
> >
>
> --
> Sent from my Jolla
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20150427/479478c4/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list