Thanks Warin, The Queen Street Mall in Brisbane is exactly that, a pedestrian highway area and with the tag, however I did read something that the tag has to be on the way not the relation so probably the reason routing doesn't work there. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7781404
I think it makes sense for something that really is a highway, it feels wrong tagging a park like that though, and iD instantly renders it different so I suspect it'll introduce rendering problems. When I get some time I'll try to jump into the GraphHopper discussion to see if I can understand the problem better and see if a rudimentary implementation is possible. I can already see how hard it is, how do you know you can get from a residential road to a park for example. Thanks again, Jono On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 3:18 PM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 01-Feb-18 03:35 PM, Jonathon Rossi wrote: > > > Exists for areas of concrete too > Yes true, including car parks which usually don't have footpaths. > > > I think if you tag an area as pedestrian, or as steps .. routes will not > go across them. > Did you mean to say will or will not go across them? > > > Will NOT go across them. Someone suggest that they may use the way itself > for routing - so goes around the outside .. that would be helpful at least. > > And how would you tag an area as "pedestrian"? > > Create a closed way (that is an area), then tag it with > > highway=pedestrian > area=yes (this last should not be required ... but belt and braces > approach) > > Refer Way: 354759945 > For steps refer Relation: 4645750 > > > > Sounds like the general consensus is that routing is "broken" and we > continue mapping as you'd expect, and there are no real good workarounds. > > Thanks > > On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 6:48 AM Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> A 'well known' routing problem. >> >> Exists for areas of concrete too ... I think if you tag an area as >> pedestrian, or as steps .. routes will not go across them. >> For an area of steps the bottom, top and sides can have ways that are >> paths ... that gets around the routing issue. >> In the longer term routes should solve the problem .. they don't see it >> as an urgent issue as there are not many people using pedestrian routing. >> >> >> On 01-Feb-18 01:45 AM, Jonathon Rossi wrote: >> >> It appears that this is a long standing enhancement request for >> GraphHopper: >> https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/issues/82 >> >> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 12:17 AM Jonathon Rossi <j...@jonorossi.com> >> wrote: >> >>> To clarify, both Google Maps and Strava routing can't do this either, I >>> was trying to work out if OSM could do this. >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 12:10 AM Jonathon Rossi <j...@jonorossi.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> In the past I've mapped exactly what I've surveyed on the ground in >>>> local parks, however I've recently been using the OSM routing feature >>>> rather than from other services and I've discovered it can't route directly >>>> across a park that is just grass. >>>> >>>> In the following example, I've mapped: >>>> - the short grass track (eastern side) that council are likely >>>> inadvertently making each time they bring vehicles through the gate to mow >>>> the park (the rest of the park boundary has timber bollards), >>>> - trails that lead from the Greater Glider Conservation Area out into >>>> the park, the small bit of the "Trail Circuit" in the park isn't actually a >>>> well defined path it just opens up but it isn't grass and the amount of >>>> trees keep it path like >>>> - other well formed paths that lead out to roads >>>> >>>> >>>> https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=-27.54259%2C153.22173%3B-27.54227%2C153.21904#map=18/-27.54200/153.22056 >>>> >>>> The OSM Wiki states: >>>> >>>> > Ways (highway=path or highway=footway) leading into a park from a >>>> road, should always be connected to the road for routing purposes. It's >>>> debatable whether they should connect to the park area with a shared node, >>>> or cross over the polygon without connecting. TODO discuss >>>> > (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=park) >>>> >>>> If a park is just a big grass area (with maybe a few obstacles like a >>>> playground) then it feels like the responsibility of the routing engine to >>>> just do this (maybe with an access tag to say it is okay to do so). It >>>> feels wrong for us mappers to map a "grass" path through the park from each >>>> entrance that we feel is a main thoroughfare. >>>> >>>> Am I missing something, have others "fixed" this problem elsewhere? >>>> >>>> Jono >>>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-au mailing >> listTalk-au@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-au mailing list >> Talk-au@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au >> > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
