Am 21.09.2020 um 14:54 schrieb Paul Allen:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 at 11:06, Supaplex < <>> wrote:

    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 wish to go to point B, which involves a "wild crossing" at some point between the two. However, there is a real crossing at point C, a mile beyond point B,  A router 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

Reply via email to