On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:15:47 +0300, Eddy Petrișor <eddy.petri...@gmail.com> wrote: > I meant "shouldn't be passed through". An exception should be made if > one of the ends is within the private area. So in other words, the > cost of going through an access=private node or way should be way > higher than a regular road so that the passing should occur only if > absolutely necessary (e.g. must leave a private area or must reach a > private area).
Hint: Note that a very high cost also means that a huge number of roads that would never lead anywhere near the destination get evaluated in most routing-algorithms. The proper way would probably be to threat ways with access=destination as non-existent unless they >contain< the destination/start. However that crossing multiple such ways to get to the nearest or the optimal street that is generally available can be a small challenge in coding. That is, if the internal data-format supports such rules at all. So, access=destination is not as easy to implement as you may think. (Same way no one has yet implemented no_uturn turn-restrictions or turn-restrictions with more then 1 node or more then 0 ways in the "via" role.) Marcus _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
