Am 21.09.2020 um 14:54 schrieb Paul Allen:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 at 11:06, Supaplex <supap...@riseup.net
The problem remains that physically non-existent road crossings
("wildly crossing the street"), which in reality represent a
crossing possibility for many users, are still not available for
routing. In my opinion, this problem is not very relevant if
separate ways are well mapped (which they often are unfortunately
not!) and all essential routable connections are in the database.
At the beginning and at the end of the route, people can use their
brains ("destination across the street") if their routers do not
solve this task for them.
This isn't as simple as you make out. Assume that I am at point A and
go to point B, which involves a "wild crossing" at some point between
However, there is a real crossing at point C, a mile beyond point B,
will direct me to travel to point C (a mile further than my
destination) in order
to cross the road there, so I can then walk a mile back to B.
You really walk a mile beyond and back again, knowing your destination
is - say 10-20 m - across the street?
Or do you not know that your destination is at the street you walk along?
I call those assumes a 'theoretical island problem'.
a) Your point A is as near at point B, that you know or can estimate
where you have to cross.
b) Your point A is so far away from point B , that there is - or at
least should be mapped - another possible crossing before ('virtual'
connection at a T-crossing or similar) .
c) Most routers have a display - and the view should show your
destination (or route path to) across the street.
Maybe my view of a) and b) is a bit european centric - but I assume
foreign cities would match and for foreign countrysides the seperate way
problem would not apply.
Tagging mailing list