Hello Peter
Not quite a unit test as such but I guess this demonstrates the issue.
@Test
public void testWayType()
{
OSMWay way = new OSMWay(1);
way.setTag("highway", "secondary");
way.setTag("bicycle", "yes");
long allowed = encoder.acceptWay(way);
long encoded = encoder.handleWayTags(way, allowed, 0);
TranslationMap trMap = TranslationMapTest.SINGLETON;
Translation tr = trMap.getWithFallBack(Locale.US);
InstructionAnnotation annotation = encoder.getAnnotation(encoded, tr);
assertEquals("road", annotation.getMessage());
}
And I would’t expect it to be related to that pull request as that seems to be
more related to selecting speeds.
Sincerely
Stuart Adam
On 2 Jun 2015, at 15:23, Peter <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Stuart,
>
> do you have a simple unit test where it shows for which tagging you expect a
> different behaviour?
>
> Maybe this is related to:
> https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/pull/421 ?
>
> Regards,
> Peter
>
> On 02.06.2015 16:17, Stuart Adam wrote:
>> Hello all
>>
>> I am starting to look at bike routing and I note in the handleBikeRelated
>> method in BikeCommonFlagEncoder the following logic applies.
>>
>> if (way.hasTag("bicycle", intendedValues))
>> {
>> if (isPusingSection && !way.hasTag("bicycle", "designated"))
>> wayType = WayType.OTHER_SMALL_WAY;
>> else
>> wayType = WayType.CYCLEWAY;
>> } else if ("cycleway".equals(highway))
>> wayType = WayType.CYCLEWAY;
>> else if (roadValues.contains(highway))
>> wayType = WayType.ROAD;
>>
>>
>> This does not seem correct to me as from my understanding this is taking the
>> fact that a way has been marked as having a right of way for bicycles (but
>> not a pushing section) then it is a full blown cyclepath. In my mind at
>> least cycleway implies dedicated and marked (normally with differently
>> coloured tarmac) sections which is a much stronger indication for cycle use
>> than just a bicycle right of way.
>>
>>
>> Am I correct and if so should this be changed or was there a reason for this
>> decision in Graphhopper.
>>
>> Sincerely
>> Stuart Adam
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> GraphHopper mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper
>
> _______________________________________________
> GraphHopper mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper
_______________________________________________
GraphHopper mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/graphhopper
