[OSM-talk] Routing on osm.org

[Nick Whitelegg]

Nice to have routing on the main site, but....

This has revealed quite a big nasty that has happened in Hampshire recently!

I've tried some foot routing out and it appears that someone has done a mass addition of access=private to large numbers of ROWs in Hampshire.

See

http://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=50.96550%2C-1.17800%3B50.96090%2C-1.18780#map=17/50.96265/-1.18302

for instance

It should be routing you along the footpath, instead it routes along the road.

Not sure who's done this but will investigate later - I sincerely hope it was a mistake!!!

Nick

________________________________________
From: simon at mungewell.org <simon at mungewell.org>
Sent: 17 February 2015 22:45
To: christian.pietzsch at googlemail.com
Cc: Talk Openstreetmap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Routing on osm.org

> OSRM and other routers won't use the highway you want it to use because
> its
> under construction in the OSM data (
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/27593150#map=13/50.4550/-113.8127&layers=Q).

Ahh, that would probably do it. I have removed 'construction=trunk' and
'motor_vehicle=no' tags as they are incorrect.

Will check back in a few days to see if it fixed the routing problem.

> Most often it's not  router but a data problem.

Absolutely... the data is to blame!

The point I was making is that routing often highlights that there is an
issue, maybe a quick link to add a note (or something) that local/expert
mappers could validate would be of benefit.

Cheers,
Simon
(who really should pay more TLC to mapping in his area)


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk