2010/12/7 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
If all a router knows about is the perimeter, it shouldn't be cutting
through an area. If it understands areas, and the area is tagged as
routable (implicitly or explicitly), then yeah, it should.
sorry for joining quite late in this thread, I wanted to
On 05/12/2010 22:07, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Dave F.dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
As long as there are external ways connecting to the area, a router should
be able to find the appropriate entrances exits by tracking the perimeter.
I thought they were already able to
On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 20:56 +, Dave F. wrote:
- which, if all they
know about is the perimeter, is probably a good thing.
Eh? I thought you said you'd love it if it cut directly across an area??
They don't have to *follow* the perimeter just use it to find the best
exit then
On 06/12/2010 21:06, David Murn wrote:
On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 20:56 +, Dave F. wrote:
- which, if all they
know about is the perimeter, is probably a good thing.
Eh? I thought you said you'd love it if it cut directly across an area??
They don't have to *follow* the perimeter just use
On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 21:18 +, Dave F. wrote:
On 06/12/2010 21:06, David Murn wrote:
On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 20:56 +, Dave F. wrote:
- which, if all they
know about is the perimeter, is probably a good thing.
Eh? I thought you said you'd love it if it cut directly across an
On 06/12/2010 21:42, David Murn wrote:
On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 21:18 +, Dave F. wrote:
On 06/12/2010 21:06, David Murn wrote:
On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 20:56 +, Dave F. wrote:
- which, if all they
know about is the perimeter, is probably a good thing.
Eh? I thought you said you'd love
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
On 05/12/2010 22:07, Anthony wrote:
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Dave F.dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
As long as there are external ways connecting to the area, a router
should
be able to find the appropriate
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 4:42 PM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
However, please understand that
most of us use routing software, expecting it not to try and take
shortcuts across unmapped areas.
Who said anything about taking shortcuts across *unmapped* areas? How
in the world would
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
On 05/12/2010 22:07, Anthony wrote:
- which, if all they
know about is the perimeter, is probably a good thing.
Eh? I thought you said you'd love it if it cut
On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 18:21 -0500, Anthony wrote:
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 4:42 PM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
However, please understand that
most of us use routing software, expecting it not to try and take
shortcuts across unmapped areas.
Who said anything about taking
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:11 PM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 18:21 -0500, Anthony wrote:
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 4:42 PM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
However, please understand that
most of us use routing software, expecting it not to try and
,
and so will the user act when he is actually presented with the area ;)
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org
[mailto:talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org] Namens David Murn
Verzonden: zondag 5 december 2010 2:36
Aan: Anthony
CC: OSM Talk
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] routing
On 01/12/2010 00:48, David Murn wrote:
On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 19:14 -0500, Anthony wrote:
That's nonsense. A way does not show a right of passage. A
particularly tagged way shows a right of passage. And a park is a
particularly tagged way.
No, a park *CAN BE* a particularly tagged way.
Can
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote:
As long as there are external ways connecting to the area, a router should
be able to find the appropriate entrances exits by tracking the perimeter.
I thought they were already able to do that, but maybe not.
Surely they
On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 00:00 -0500, Anthony wrote:
Anyway, I looked around at a few places labelled leisure=park, and the
usage is all over the place. I'd say based on that very unscientific
sample that it's probably best for routers to use a default of
access=unknown for leisure=park areas,
On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 00:00 -0500, Anthony wrote:
Alternatively, I guess it wouldn't be horrible to add something like a
highway=shortcut tag, so mappers could be explicit about it. If we've
gotta add foot=permissive by hand anyway, it's not that much more work
to add a few extra ways.
I
Robin Paulson robin.paulson at gmail.com writes:
I walk a lot, and would like a routing engine which understands i can
take a direct route across an open public space, such as a park,
without needing a footpath to be explicitly drawn in. the existing
routing engines don't seem to understand this.
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 2:22 AM, Robin Paulson robin.paul...@gmail.comwrote:
hi,
i walk a lot, and would like a routing engine which understands i can
take a direct route across an open public space, such as a park,
without needing a footpath to be explicitly drawn in. the existing
routing
Robin Paulson schrieb:
or am i missing a tag? do i need to tag parks, etc. with area=yes
foot=yes, access=yes or would that be a case of tagging for the
routing engine
Note that in some park, stepping on the grass is explicitely forbidden,
so automatically routing across park space may pose a
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 2:22 AM, Robin Paulson robin.paul...@gmail.comwrote:
hi,
i walk a lot, and would like a routing engine which understands i can
take a direct route across an open public space, such as a park,
without
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
Robin Paulson schrieb:
or am i missing a tag? do i need to tag parks, etc. with area=yes
foot=yes, access=yes or would that be a case of tagging for the
routing engine
Note that in some park, stepping on the grass is
On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 15:30 +, Ed Avis wrote:
Not all park land is walkable - some can be trees or bushes - so some extra
tagging is needed.
Another problem, is that you may not be able to traverse the park in all
directions. It may have a fence with only a couple of access gates, or
you
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:29 AM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 15:30 +, Ed Avis wrote:
As a rough rule, leisure=park and landuse=grass could be considered walkable,
unless tagged access=no or access=private.
You may also find timed access restrictions
David Murn davey at incanberra.com.au writes:
Not all park land is walkable - some can be trees or bushes - so some extra
tagging is needed.
Another problem, is that you may not be able to traverse the park in all
directions. It may have a fence with only a couple of access gates, or
you may
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:14 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 2:22 AM, Robin Paulson
robin.paul...@gmail.comwrote:
hi,
i walk a lot, and would like a routing engine which understands i can
On 30.11.2010 17:17, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Robert Kaiserka...@kairo.at wrote:
Robin Paulson schrieb:
or am i missing a tag? do i need to tag parks, etc. with area=yes
foot=yes, access=yes or would that be a case of tagging for the
routing engine
Note that in some
On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 11:43 -0500, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:29 AM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 15:30 +, Ed Avis wrote:
As a rough rule, leisure=park and landuse=grass could be considered
walkable,
unless tagged access=no or
On 1 December 2010 11:22, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
Thats great, what happens if someone traces the park from aerial
imagery, and doesnt know/care about any of those? Or for that matter,
if someone tags it on-the-ground, but doesnt add all the details?
What defautls should
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 5:22 PM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 11:43 -0500, Anthony wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:29 AM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 15:30 +, Ed Avis wrote:
As a rough rule, leisure=park and
On 1 December 2010 11:55, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
A park. Open, green area for recreation, usually municipal. These are
outdoor areas, typically grassy/green areas, set aside of leisure and
recreation.
Typically (or pretty much always) open to the public, but may be
fenced off, and may
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Felix Hartmann extremecar...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think routing over areas will ever work well. It might work for 2-3
areas and that is already really difficult for calculation. Just routing
onto an open space is no problem, but calculating a route over a
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Robin Paulson robin.paul...@gmail.com wrote:
but it's getting away form the point: parks are
only one implementation/manifestation of the situation. i'm enquiring
about routing across areas in general, and whether anyone does/will do
it.
I don't think anyone
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Just take the n ways which connect to the area, and
run
http://www.loria.fr/~lazard/Publications/Curvature-constrained_shortest_path_in_a_convex_polygon/Curvature-constrained_shortest_path_in_a_convex_polygon.html
Actually, that
On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 12:01 +1300, Robin Paulson wrote:
That's nonsense. A way does not show a right of passage. A
particularly tagged way shows a right of passage. And a park is a
particularly tagged way.
No, a park *CAN BE* a particularly tagged way. Just like a road, if it
isnt
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 6:57 PM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 12:01 +1300, Robin Paulson wrote:
That's nonsense. A way does not show a right of passage. A
particularly tagged way shows a right of passage. And a park is a
particularly tagged way.
No,
On 1 December 2010 13:14, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
I'd love it. It's a feature I'm quite looking forward to. One day
OSM will be able to route me from Linkwood Avenue to Pine Bay Drive
through the park
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=28.07187lon=-82.550402zoom=18layers=M),
saving me
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Robin Paulson robin.paul...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 December 2010 13:14, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
I'd love it. It's a feature I'm quite looking forward to. One day
OSM will be able to route me from Linkwood Avenue to Pine Bay Drive
through the park
On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 19:14 -0500, Anthony wrote:
That's nonsense. A way does not show a right of passage. A
particularly tagged way shows a right of passage. And a park is a
particularly tagged way.
No, a park *CAN BE* a particularly tagged way.
Can be? How can you represent
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 7:48 PM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 19:14 -0500, Anthony wrote:
That's nonsense. A way does not show a right of passage. A
particularly tagged way shows a right of passage. And a park is a
particularly tagged way.
No, a
On Tue, 2010-11-30 at 20:24 -0500, Anthony wrote:
One day OSM will be able to route me from Linkwood Avenue to Pine Bay Drive
through the park
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=28.07187lon=-82.550402zoom=18layers=M),
saving me 50 minutes of walking.
Imagine if you tried to save 50min
One day OSM will be able to route me from Linkwood Avenue to Pine Bay
Drive
through the park
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=28.07187lon=-82.550402zoom=18layers=M),
saving me 50 minutes of walking.
Imagine if you tried to save 50min by getting routed across Albert
Park[1].
hi,
i walk a lot, and would like a routing engine which understands i can
take a direct route across an open public space, such as a park,
without needing a footpath to be explicitly drawn in. the existing
routing engines don't seem to understand this.
or am i missing a tag? do i need to tag
42 matches
Mail list logo
