>I can see some value in mapping routes through a >room which is full of obstacles, but I don't like >the idea of using this where a routing graph >could be calculated from indoor=corridor/area/room >polygons just fine. >While the slow progress of OSM-based routing >engines in this regard is regrettable, trading >extra mapper hours for something that could be >realistically automated always seems wasteful to me.
Yes, I've thought that this the best way to handle routing with SIT...but is this more of a potential solution or research project versus something that can be used for indoor routing in the near term. There would be a non-trivial amount of work involved, for sure, to add this tagging. It amounts to mapping a building in SIT, then going back to map indoor routes. The issue of obstacles is big, though. There is a huge number and variety of obstacles indoors, both temporary and permanent--everything from sunken floor pits to stationary exhibits, all kinds of things. We can make up tags, of course, but for the most part I think a lot of this will just not be mapped. I think about different kinds of rooms, like a lobby where the best route is a straight line from door to door, versus a conference room where there are usually varied arrangements of tables or temporary seating that always leaves an aisle down the center of the room or around the walls; some of this is venue-specific. I work with a lot of travelers who are blind and for whom those kinds of decisions are not apparent. For example, a few months ago I guided a colleague through a museum that used temporary walls to display artworks within a large gallery room (which formed a series of "traps" for him), and changed the layout of these walls every few months. They always used a common walkway that would be easy to mark, though, and much more feasible to maintain than all those movable walls. I'll add a statement emphasizing that this is to be used in addition to rather than instead of SIT. The points about using highway=footway instead of another tag are important ones, and I'll add them to the discussion section. Jeremiah >>From: Jeremiah Rose >>Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2019 12:41 PM >>To: tagging@openstreetmap.org; ind...@openstreetmap.org >>Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - footway=indoor >> >>Here's a proposal for marking indoor routes within a building mapped with >>Simple Indoor Tagging. >> >>footway=indoor: indoor pedestrian route >>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/footway%3Dindoor >> >>Jeremiah Rose _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
