Re: [OSRM-talk] Foot profile
> Am 03/mag/2014 um 15:00 schrieb Sarah Hoffmann :
>
> you can exclude all ways with area=yes from routing. Simply add something
> like this in way_function() of your profile:
>
> if way.tags:Find('area') ~= '' then
>return 0
> end
>
> But this might do more harm than good.
+1, I wouldn't exclude pedestrian areas from routing. They should of course be
connected, many situations would become islands if routing on areas is off.
One issue that currently is yet to solve afaik are pedestrian areas defined by
multipolygons, their ways should also be integrated into the graph
cheers,
Martin
___
OSRM-talk mailing list
OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
Re: [OSRM-talk] Foot profile
Hi,
On Sat, May 03, 2014 at 12:23:53PM +0200, Emmanuel Bégué wrote:
> On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Sarah Hoffmann wrote:
> >
> > That's an old unmaintained one which really should be removed.
> > Please try one of those two:
> >
> > https://github.com/sosm/cbf-routing-profiles/blob/master/foot-city.lua
> > https://github.com/sosm/cbf-routing-profiles/blob/master/foot-hiking.lua
> >
> > They work fine against OSRM versions 0.3.3 - 0.3.9.
>
> Ok, many thanks for your answer; I followed your instructions and was
> able to use those profiles! So that's great, and thank you again. ;-)
>
> Unfortunately the initial problem isn't solved; some points in Paris
> (lots of them) are apparently non-navigable by foot -- many times, for
> instance, at the center of roundabouts (but not only, and not always).
>
> It's quite strange since when one asks to navigate to/from the middle
> of the river, or the center of a building, or the middle of a highway,
> a path is found that goes to the nearest accessible point.
>
> So it seems, in principle, a path should always be found? What makes
> pathfinding fail in some cases?
Looking at your initial example 48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288,
the problem here is the pedestrian area
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/108166051
OSRM takes that as a way which is routable (highway=pedestrian being
walkable and all) but as there are no footways that leave the area,
there is no way to get out.
Personally, I think this is a tagging error. Pedestrian areas always
should be connected to the way network. As a quick fix for your routing,
you can exclude all ways with area=yes from routing. Simply add something
like this in way_function() of your profile:
if way.tags:Find('area') ~= '' then
return 0
end
But this might do more harm than good.
Kind regards
Sarah
___
OSRM-talk mailing list
OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
Re: [OSRM-talk] Foot profile
On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: > > That's an old unmaintained one which really should be removed. > Please try one of those two: > > https://github.com/sosm/cbf-routing-profiles/blob/master/foot-city.lua > https://github.com/sosm/cbf-routing-profiles/blob/master/foot-hiking.lua > > They work fine against OSRM versions 0.3.3 - 0.3.9. Ok, many thanks for your answer; I followed your instructions and was able to use those profiles! So that's great, and thank you again. ;-) Unfortunately the initial problem isn't solved; some points in Paris (lots of them) are apparently non-navigable by foot -- many times, for instance, at the center of roundabouts (but not only, and not always). It's quite strange since when one asks to navigate to/from the middle of the river, or the center of a building, or the middle of a highway, a path is found that goes to the nearest accessible point. So it seems, in principle, a path should always be found? What makes pathfinding fail in some cases? I'm using the most recent data published by geofabrik two days ago, and upgraded Project-OSRM to 3.9. I'd really like to get to the bottom of this: would it help to run osrm in debug mode? Any other idea? Thanks, Regards, EB ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
Re: [OSRM-talk] Foot profile
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 11:48:56AM +0200, Emmanuel Bégué wrote: > Hello, > > I'm trying to use foot.lua from cbf-routing-profiles > direct link: > https://github.com/sosm/cbf-routing-profiles/blob/master/foot.lua That's an old unmaintained one which really should be removed. Please try one of those two: https://github.com/sosm/cbf-routing-profiles/blob/master/foot-city.lua https://github.com/sosm/cbf-routing-profiles/blob/master/foot-hiking.lua They work fine against OSRM versions 0.3.3 - 0.3.9. > Then I tried to remove the four first lines "require..." from > foot.lua, as no require is used in current profiles (and car.lua even > says in a comment "function temporarily inlined"). Those requires are necessecary. The library files can be found in lib/ and you need to supply the directory path to osrm-extract and osrm-prepare, like that: LUA_PATH="$scriptdir/lib/?.lua" ./osrm-extract see https://github.com/sosm/cbf-routing-profiles/blob/master/compile_profiles.sh for how those profiles are used with OSRM in osm.ch's production environment. > Is this syntax documented? Or, how does one write a profile from > scratch? (Or at least, how does one read a profile?) > > (I would be happy to recursively test little modifications to existing > profiles, but since extract/prepare takes a long time, it doesn't seem > like a practical solution...) That's what I did. Use a smaller extract for testing and it works ok. Cheers Sarah > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:16 PM, Emmanuel Bégué wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: > >> > >> We have adapted foot profiles on our Swiss installation[1], which seem > >> to work fairly ok. Code is here: > >> https://github.com/sosm/cbf-routing-profiles > > > > Thanks!! I'll give it a try ;-) > > > > Regards, > > EB > > ___ > OSRM-talk mailing list > OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
Re: [OSRM-talk] Foot profile
Hello, I'm trying to use foot.lua from cbf-routing-profiles direct link: https://github.com/sosm/cbf-routing-profiles/blob/master/foot.lua as a profile for osrm-extract, and it's not working (osrm-extract works fine with profiles from the Project-OSRM repository, but not with cbf ones). At first I immediately got the error: terminate called recursively Then I tried to remove the four first lines "require..." from foot.lua, as no require is used in current profiles (and car.lua even says in a comment "function temporarily inlined"). Extract now fails a little bit later, with this error: [info] Using turn restrictions [info] Found no exceptions to turn restrictions [info] Parsing in progress.. terminate called after throwing an instance of 'luabind::error' It would seem that the syntax of the current profiles are different from the one used in the cbf versions (which are 5 to 12 months old). Is this syntax documented? Or, how does one write a profile from scratch? (Or at least, how does one read a profile?) (I would be happy to recursively test little modifications to existing profiles, but since extract/prepare takes a long time, it doesn't seem like a practical solution...) Thanks, Regards, EB On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:16 PM, Emmanuel Bégué wrote: > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: >> >> We have adapted foot profiles on our Swiss installation[1], which seem >> to work fairly ok. Code is here: >> https://github.com/sosm/cbf-routing-profiles > > Thanks!! I'll give it a try ;-) > > Regards, > EB ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
Re: [OSRM-talk] Foot profile
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 8:36 PM, Sarah Hoffmann wrote: > > We have adapted foot profiles on our Swiss installation[1], which seem > to work fairly ok. Code is here: > https://github.com/sosm/cbf-routing-profiles Thanks!! I'll give it a try ;-) Regards, EB ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
Re: [OSRM-talk] Foot profile
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 07:18:34PM +0200, Emmanuel Bégué wrote: > Thanks for a prompt reply, but how would poor data quality explain the > fact that two points that are very very near one another result in > such a different outcome? > > Where can I find more information in how to write profiles? > > And, in your experience, would a "car" profile that would basically > accept to take any road, and ignore road directions, be an acceptable > approximation for a foot profile? We have adapted foot profiles on our Swiss installation[1], which seem to work fairly ok. Code is here: https://github.com/sosm/cbf-routing-profiles (foot-city.lua for 'city walking', i.e. shorter route, foot-hiking.lua for 'hiking', i.e. less asphalt, quieter roads) Main gotcha: the profile misuses speed to get appropriate route preferences. The frontend therefore ignores the times it gets from OSRM and simply computes its own using the distance and a fixed speed. Cheers Sarah [1] http://routing.osm.ch > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Dennis Luxen wrote: > > Salut Emmanuel, > > > > the foot profile is the least maintained. And foot data is among the most > > inconsistent tagged data in OSM. You routing data probably broke into many, > > many unconnected pieces. > > > > —Dennis > > > > > > Am 29.04.2014 um 18:29 schrieb Emmanuel Bégué : > > > >> Hello, > >> > >> Trying to use Project-OSRM for directions by foot, it seems some > >> points simply don't work, either as start or stop points, whereas > >> points that are very near, work fine (as well as some points that > >> shouldn't be reachable because for example they're in the water). > >> > >> For example the point 48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 (north of > >> Paris), used as a start or an end point, always results in 207, > >> "Cannot find route between points". > >> > >> But if we use instead 48.88371088449246,2.332277297973633 (a few > >> meters away) then everything's fine; or if we use the offending point > >> with a car profile on Project-OSRM demo site: no problem. > >> > >> No problem either if we begin or end our journey in the middle of a > >> river: 48.85939286077621,2.331901788711548, so it's clearly not the > >> case that the destination point is somehow "unreachable" by foot. > >> > >> I have tried to set the offending point to the nearest node with > >> "locate" but that didn't help: > >>locate?48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 => 48.883674,2.332385 > >> -- but that last point doesn't work any better. > >> > >> How can I investigate this? (How do we ask Project-OSRM to print more > >> elaborate error messages?) > >> > >> I'm using Project-OSRM version before 3.9, the stock "foot.lua" > >> profile and OSM data for France from Geofabrik. > >> > >> Thanks for any pointer. > >> > >> Regards, > >> EB > >> > >> ___ > >> OSRM-talk mailing list > >> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org > >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk > > > > > > ___ > > OSRM-talk mailing list > > OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk > > ___ > OSRM-talk mailing list > OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
Re: [OSRM-talk] Foot profile
Mitch, yes, it is quite easy to generate a shape file that contains the geometries of all ‚small‘ components that are badly connected. You would need to boot strap with tools enabled cmake .. -DWITH_TOOLS=1 It requires libgdal to build. Then you run make to build the thing and subsequently the osrm-components tool generates the shape file: ./osrm-components file.osrm file.osrm.restrictiins. It will dump a components.shp file that highlights the errors. Note that we do this already for the road network in car routing. To get an idea, go to the demo site at http://osrm.at, zoom to z14+ and select the ‚small components‘ layer in the layer switcher. It will display bad pieces of road in purple. —Dennis Am 29.04.2014 um 19:24 schrieb Mitchell Oliver : > Is there a way we could use the foot profile to generate a set of broken > routes we can feed into MapRoulette? > > Mitch Oliver > SENIOR DEVELOPER > > +1 (513) 319 3230 > mi...@roadtrippers.com > > Website Press Kit Twitter Facebook > > On Apr 29, 2014, at 1:18 PM, Emmanuel Bégué wrote: > >> Thanks for a prompt reply, but how would poor data quality explain the >> fact that two points that are very very near one another result in >> such a different outcome? >> >> Where can I find more information in how to write profiles? >> >> And, in your experience, would a "car" profile that would basically >> accept to take any road, and ignore road directions, be an acceptable >> approximation for a foot profile? >> >> Thanks, >> Regards, >> EB >> >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Dennis Luxen wrote: >>> Salut Emmanuel, >>> >>> the foot profile is the least maintained. And foot data is among the most >>> inconsistent tagged data in OSM. You routing data probably broke into many, >>> many unconnected pieces. >>> >>> —Dennis >>> >>> >>> Am 29.04.2014 um 18:29 schrieb Emmanuel Bégué : >>> Hello, Trying to use Project-OSRM for directions by foot, it seems some points simply don't work, either as start or stop points, whereas points that are very near, work fine (as well as some points that shouldn't be reachable because for example they're in the water). For example the point 48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 (north of Paris), used as a start or an end point, always results in 207, "Cannot find route between points". But if we use instead 48.88371088449246,2.332277297973633 (a few meters away) then everything's fine; or if we use the offending point with a car profile on Project-OSRM demo site: no problem. No problem either if we begin or end our journey in the middle of a river: 48.85939286077621,2.331901788711548, so it's clearly not the case that the destination point is somehow "unreachable" by foot. I have tried to set the offending point to the nearest node with "locate" but that didn't help: locate?48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 => 48.883674,2.332385 -- but that last point doesn't work any better. How can I investigate this? (How do we ask Project-OSRM to print more elaborate error messages?) I'm using Project-OSRM version before 3.9, the stock "foot.lua" profile and OSM data for France from Geofabrik. Thanks for any pointer. Regards, EB ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> OSRM-talk mailing list >>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk >> >> ___ >> OSRM-talk mailing list >> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk > > ___ > OSRM-talk mailing list > OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
Re: [OSRM-talk] Foot profile
Is there a way we could use the foot profile to generate a set of broken routes we can feed into MapRoulette? Mitch Oliver SENIOR DEVELOPER +1 (513) 319 3230 mi...@roadtrippers.com Website Press Kit Twitter Facebook On Apr 29, 2014, at 1:18 PM, Emmanuel Bégué wrote: > Thanks for a prompt reply, but how would poor data quality explain the > fact that two points that are very very near one another result in > such a different outcome? > > Where can I find more information in how to write profiles? > > And, in your experience, would a "car" profile that would basically > accept to take any road, and ignore road directions, be an acceptable > approximation for a foot profile? > > Thanks, > Regards, > EB > > > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Dennis Luxen wrote: >> Salut Emmanuel, >> >> the foot profile is the least maintained. And foot data is among the most >> inconsistent tagged data in OSM. You routing data probably broke into many, >> many unconnected pieces. >> >> —Dennis >> >> >> Am 29.04.2014 um 18:29 schrieb Emmanuel Bégué : >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Trying to use Project-OSRM for directions by foot, it seems some >>> points simply don't work, either as start or stop points, whereas >>> points that are very near, work fine (as well as some points that >>> shouldn't be reachable because for example they're in the water). >>> >>> For example the point 48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 (north of >>> Paris), used as a start or an end point, always results in 207, >>> "Cannot find route between points". >>> >>> But if we use instead 48.88371088449246,2.332277297973633 (a few >>> meters away) then everything's fine; or if we use the offending point >>> with a car profile on Project-OSRM demo site: no problem. >>> >>> No problem either if we begin or end our journey in the middle of a >>> river: 48.85939286077621,2.331901788711548, so it's clearly not the >>> case that the destination point is somehow "unreachable" by foot. >>> >>> I have tried to set the offending point to the nearest node with >>> "locate" but that didn't help: >>> locate?48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 => 48.883674,2.332385 >>> -- but that last point doesn't work any better. >>> >>> How can I investigate this? (How do we ask Project-OSRM to print more >>> elaborate error messages?) >>> >>> I'm using Project-OSRM version before 3.9, the stock "foot.lua" >>> profile and OSM data for France from Geofabrik. >>> >>> Thanks for any pointer. >>> >>> Regards, >>> EB >>> >>> ___ >>> OSRM-talk mailing list >>> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk >> >> >> ___ >> OSRM-talk mailing list >> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk > > ___ > OSRM-talk mailing list > OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
Re: [OSRM-talk] Foot profile
may be the road network is disconnected, so that the algorthim find a node on a edge that as no connection to the whole network. This is a problem, may be a depth-search-first would help to detected this kind of errors. As far as I know OSRM has no plugin to check the network or? Regards Carsten Gesendet: Dienstag, 29. April 2014 um 12:18 Uhr Von: "Emmanuel Bégué" An: "Mailing list to discuss Project OSRM" Betreff: Re: [OSRM-talk] Foot profile Thanks for a prompt reply, but how would poor data quality explain the fact that two points that are very very near one another result in such a different outcome? Where can I find more information in how to write profiles? And, in your experience, would a "car" profile that would basically accept to take any road, and ignore road directions, be an acceptable approximation for a foot profile? Thanks, Regards, EB On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Dennis Luxen wrote: > Salut Emmanuel, > > the foot profile is the least maintained. And foot data is among the most inconsistent tagged data in OSM. You routing data probably broke into many, many unconnected pieces. > > —Dennis > > > Am 29.04.2014 um 18:29 schrieb Emmanuel Bégué : > >> Hello, >> >> Trying to use Project-OSRM for directions by foot, it seems some >> points simply don't work, either as start or stop points, whereas >> points that are very near, work fine (as well as some points that >> shouldn't be reachable because for example they're in the water). >> >> For example the point 48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 (north of >> Paris), used as a start or an end point, always results in 207, >> "Cannot find route between points". >> >> But if we use instead 48.88371088449246,2.332277297973633 (a few >> meters away) then everything's fine; or if we use the offending point >> with a car profile on Project-OSRM demo site: no problem. >> >> No problem either if we begin or end our journey in the middle of a >> river: 48.85939286077621,2.331901788711548, so it's clearly not the >> case that the destination point is somehow "unreachable" by foot. >> >> I have tried to set the offending point to the nearest node with >> "locate" but that didn't help: >> locate?48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 => 48.883674,2.332385 >> -- but that last point doesn't work any better. >> >> How can I investigate this? (How do we ask Project-OSRM to print more >> elaborate error messages?) >> >> I'm using Project-OSRM version before 3.9, the stock "foot.lua" >> profile and OSM data for France from Geofabrik. >> >> Thanks for any pointer. >> >> Regards, >> EB >> >> ___ >> OSRM-talk mailing list >> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk > > > ___ > OSRM-talk mailing list > OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
Re: [OSRM-talk] Foot profile
Thanks for a prompt reply, but how would poor data quality explain the fact that two points that are very very near one another result in such a different outcome? Where can I find more information in how to write profiles? And, in your experience, would a "car" profile that would basically accept to take any road, and ignore road directions, be an acceptable approximation for a foot profile? Thanks, Regards, EB On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Dennis Luxen wrote: > Salut Emmanuel, > > the foot profile is the least maintained. And foot data is among the most > inconsistent tagged data in OSM. You routing data probably broke into many, > many unconnected pieces. > > —Dennis > > > Am 29.04.2014 um 18:29 schrieb Emmanuel Bégué : > >> Hello, >> >> Trying to use Project-OSRM for directions by foot, it seems some >> points simply don't work, either as start or stop points, whereas >> points that are very near, work fine (as well as some points that >> shouldn't be reachable because for example they're in the water). >> >> For example the point 48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 (north of >> Paris), used as a start or an end point, always results in 207, >> "Cannot find route between points". >> >> But if we use instead 48.88371088449246,2.332277297973633 (a few >> meters away) then everything's fine; or if we use the offending point >> with a car profile on Project-OSRM demo site: no problem. >> >> No problem either if we begin or end our journey in the middle of a >> river: 48.85939286077621,2.331901788711548, so it's clearly not the >> case that the destination point is somehow "unreachable" by foot. >> >> I have tried to set the offending point to the nearest node with >> "locate" but that didn't help: >>locate?48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 => 48.883674,2.332385 >> -- but that last point doesn't work any better. >> >> How can I investigate this? (How do we ask Project-OSRM to print more >> elaborate error messages?) >> >> I'm using Project-OSRM version before 3.9, the stock "foot.lua" >> profile and OSM data for France from Geofabrik. >> >> Thanks for any pointer. >> >> Regards, >> EB >> >> ___ >> OSRM-talk mailing list >> OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk > > > ___ > OSRM-talk mailing list > OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
Re: [OSRM-talk] Foot profile
Salut Emmanuel, the foot profile is the least maintained. And foot data is among the most inconsistent tagged data in OSM. You routing data probably broke into many, many unconnected pieces. —Dennis Am 29.04.2014 um 18:29 schrieb Emmanuel Bégué : > Hello, > > Trying to use Project-OSRM for directions by foot, it seems some > points simply don't work, either as start or stop points, whereas > points that are very near, work fine (as well as some points that > shouldn't be reachable because for example they're in the water). > > For example the point 48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 (north of > Paris), used as a start or an end point, always results in 207, > "Cannot find route between points". > > But if we use instead 48.88371088449246,2.332277297973633 (a few > meters away) then everything's fine; or if we use the offending point > with a car profile on Project-OSRM demo site: no problem. > > No problem either if we begin or end our journey in the middle of a > river: 48.85939286077621,2.331901788711548, so it's clearly not the > case that the destination point is somehow "unreachable" by foot. > > I have tried to set the offending point to the nearest node with > "locate" but that didn't help: >locate?48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 => 48.883674,2.332385 > -- but that last point doesn't work any better. > > How can I investigate this? (How do we ask Project-OSRM to print more > elaborate error messages?) > > I'm using Project-OSRM version before 3.9, the stock "foot.lua" > profile and OSM data for France from Geofabrik. > > Thanks for any pointer. > > Regards, > EB > > ___ > OSRM-talk mailing list > OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
[OSRM-talk] Foot profile
Hello, Trying to use Project-OSRM for directions by foot, it seems some points simply don't work, either as start or stop points, whereas points that are very near, work fine (as well as some points that shouldn't be reachable because for example they're in the water). For example the point 48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 (north of Paris), used as a start or an end point, always results in 207, "Cannot find route between points". But if we use instead 48.88371088449246,2.332277297973633 (a few meters away) then everything's fine; or if we use the offending point with a car profile on Project-OSRM demo site: no problem. No problem either if we begin or end our journey in the middle of a river: 48.85939286077621,2.331901788711548, so it's clearly not the case that the destination point is somehow "unreachable" by foot. I have tried to set the offending point to the nearest node with "locate" but that didn't help: locate?48.88368971897955,2.332395315170288 => 48.883674,2.332385 -- but that last point doesn't work any better. How can I investigate this? (How do we ask Project-OSRM to print more elaborate error messages?) I'm using Project-OSRM version before 3.9, the stock "foot.lua" profile and OSM data for France from Geofabrik. Thanks for any pointer. Regards, EB ___ OSRM-talk mailing list OSRM-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osrm-talk
