[OSM-talk] Routing on osm.org

[SomeoneElse]

On 18/02/2015 11:38, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
> 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
>
See also

https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/41053/prow-tagging-england-wales

In this case graphhopper's "correct", because 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4453997 does not have "foot=yes" on it, 
but instead "access:foot=yes".  It used to have foot=designated on it 
until 3 years ago.

Cheers,

Andy