Some remarks, I checked with Streetview and the sign on the Tasman Drive entrance clearly mentions "Private property" and below that "No ...." in which I can't read the last word but I think it is trespassing or entrance or something similar, which means the tag "access=private" is correct.
Never, and that means never, change road tags because one navigation app is not routing like you expect. That is really a big "NO" in the mapping community. In this case OsmAnd is even 100% correct as it is really "private eaccess". It could also mean that you get a fine when really using those roads. OsmAnd does a good job from not routing your through the park. Indeed: switching on "private access" is the only thing you can do. And please, please set the "access=private" tag back as soon as possible. Harry Op zo 5 apr. 2020 om 06:42 schreef Skyler Hawthorne < [email protected]>: > Thanks for such a detailed response! These are super helpful suggestions, > and help me learn more about mapping with OSM. > > On Sat, Apr 4, 2020, at 17:51, Greg Troxel wrote: > > I believe it takes a few days for some of the online services. I > > remember this from a year or so ago when I marked a closed road under > construction and when I restored it. I checked every day or so to see > how long it took for routing to change. > > > Actually, I was wondering about this: does OSMAnd do all the route > calculation itself, locally on the device? Or does it ask an online routing > service? I might be missing it, but I don't see any options in any of the > menus that lets you configure how you would like to get routes. I did a > quick test and tried to calculate a route while my phone was in airplane > mode, and it was able to do it, which is evidence to me that it's doing a > local calculation. If it is, then routing related changes should be > reflected as soon as the map data is updated, right? > > I would be inclined, were I local, to > > move the way that represents the wall and boundary to more accurately > be on the wall > > split the way into segments of actual wall and not wall > > only tag the actual wall with barrier=wall > > create a relation of the segments both wall and not-wall types to form > a single closed relation for tagging amenity=trailer_park > > > Interesting, I considered doing something like this, but I wasn't quite > sure how to do it with the existing closed way that encases the whole park. > Thanks for the suggestion, that makes it clear how to approach it that way. > I might try that next. > > > change these roads from highway=service to highway=residential. But, > parcel data might show that they are not legally roads. I would want > to inquire what the local conventions are. It feels to me like > highway=residential is more likely the right thing, especially given > the naming. > > > Ah, that makes sense, will do. And the rest of your suggestions. > > It is not really legitimate to change tagging from private to > destination to get a router to do what you want. If it really is true > that anyone who has a legitimate reason to travel to some place within > the complex can use the road, then access=destination is the right thing > to do, regardless of routing behavior. But if it's not, and the router > isn't doing what you think it should, then the router should be fixed, > not the data made incorrect. > > > Thanks for the heads up, I'll keep that in mind. In this case, yes, anyone > who wants to go in can go in, so I think access=destination is the right > thing. > > > Did you turn on private access? > > Yes. And actually, I tried something else that yielded some really > interesting results: I added an intermediate destination somewhere else in > the park. It routed through the main entrance successfully, as it should > have, and then it exited back out the park to go back to the spot outside > the park!! I've attached a screenshot. > > This leads me to believe that there must be something wrong with either > the map data or the router. I can't find any problems with the map data. > All nodes are connected, and private road access is on. Maybe there's > something else that's confusing the router, like the fact that they're all > service roads. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OsmAnd" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/9b7d524e-233b-4efc-815c-8d76d5b7dfa1%40www.fastmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/9b7d524e-233b-4efc-815c-8d76d5b7dfa1%40www.fastmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OsmAnd" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/CAGARPpsRLY24fc_DPA_VQOuvjj7sgnw9PCFvJ2EQ82kU_RAcZA%40mail.gmail.com.
