Again, software can not handle e.g. the E2 relation. Simple sort, fine, bridge a small gap, handle a roundabout, fine, but not the more serious route-breaking issues. You can't expect Garmin to solve that, it's a data issue in OSM. Currently the only way to solve it is making the data flawless: one main route, single chain, no nodes, handle hierarchies, no duplicates, no branches, no areas. All alternatives separate. Then you can use it as is for further processing.
The main problem is maintenance against editing software and users breaking the routes. The solution should be protection against breaking, not repairing flaws at the client side. Maybe the latest improvements in ID help. It's too early to tell. I'm still encountering issues all the time in the routes I check and use. Fr gr Peter Elderson Op za 17 aug. 2019 om 15:58 schreef Joseph Eisenberg < joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>: > I agree with Andy Townsend here. > > Routes are complicated enough without needing to be always perfectly > sorted. Software developers and database users should make up for > this. Mapping is hard and takes precious human time. Computational > cycles are cheap. > > OSM has never been designed to be used directly "as-is" from the raw > data. Even JOSM and ID do all sorts of clever things to show you a > reasonable rendering of the data as you enter it. > > Please open issues requests with your favorite software providers, > like Garmin, or switch to one that will support routes in the way that > works for you. Perhaps one of the bike/hike websites like Map My Run, > Ride With GPS, etc already have something like this offered? > > Mappers should not to do extra work and extra maintenance of data. > Spend time mapping, not sorting relations. > > -Joseph Eisenberg > > (PS: I help develop software a little, by contributing at > Openstreetmap-carto to improve and maintain the rendering. I haven't > developed a routing engine or anything so complicated myself). > > On 8/17/19, Andy Townsend <ajt1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> You want to do the routing. I want to avoid that, because the routing > has > >> already been done. > > > > To be clear, I want to navigate from where I currently am to where I > want to > > go. If a route is blocked (or, heaven forfend, wrong in OSM) I still > want > > to get where I'm going, even if I am not exactly where I thought I should > > be. > > > >> OsmAnd and Garmin should take the route itself, not waypoints to route > to. > >> It is odd that OsmAnd cannot navigate me along an ÒSM route that's shown > >> on the map and is readily available from OSM. > > > > I'm not sure what the current situation is with OsmAnd, but do know that > > it's been discussed within the last few months in the OsmAnd Google Geoup > > > > With regard to Garmin, it sounds like you should be submitting a feature > > request to them - it is unlikely that they monitor OSM's tagging list for > > those. > > > > It does sound, however, that you don't have a concrete use-case at all - > you > > have a view of how things "should" be, but this doesn't seem to be > driven by > > a real-world requirement. That's why I've been asking for specifics > > throughout this thread (and Richard has too). > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Andy > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
