Am 16.01.2010 10:16, schrieb Carsten Moeller: > Yes, I do agree. We should have tags describing short and long > distances. The latter is possibly best expressed by using relations. > Yes, there are already tags for our problem: > > highway=service > amenity=ferry_terminal (if it allows cargo=vehicle) > ferry route (as tagged and displayed already on the maps) > amenity=ferry_terminal (again with cargo=vehicle) > highway=service > > But this kind of tagging is hardly parsable. In case of routing, I don't > want to collect all highway=service in the topo.
Sorry to say, if you don't take highway=service ways into account, your whole routing program gets very certainly a lot less useful to a lot of end users anyway. > For route=ferry or > rail=railway I can distinguish if they are subtagged by motorcar=true or > not. As a consequence the highway=service then should be subtagged with > sth. like "ferry-link". But this guides me to my first approach again. > In my opinion, it should be as simple as possible. That's true. But it should be as simple as possible for the mappers (as long as it's somehow usable for routers) :-) If you say "the mappers have to improve tagging, otherwise I won't be able to write a router" I'd say "write a better router". It's not because I don't like you, it's because I know that half of the mappers won't do it anyway and you'll just end up with a router not working in a lot of situations. > I'm afraid, only few > people will follow this tagging pattern and we'll end up in a forest. That's no news, regardless of what we'll discuss here ;-) > Once again, the main problem is the parsing itself. In case of the upper > example you will have to analyze relations in a second step. If you > tagged them directly It's just a one shot parsing. If you don't want to analyze relations, you will also miss other required stuff (e.g. turn restrictions). A router not analyzing relations has no future IMHO. > Another problem, as I've already mentioned before, are the connections > (even same nodes) between railroads and streets. This is a annoying and > kills the ability for OSM to route satisfyingly. No, it doesn't ;-) Regards, ULFL _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
