On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:56 PM, Dave F. <[email protected]> wrote: > On 05/12/2010 22:07, Anthony wrote: >> >> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Dave F.<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> As long as there are external ways connecting to the area, a router >>> should >>> be able to find the appropriate entrances& exits by tracking the >>> perimeter. >>> I thought they were already able to do that, but maybe not. >> >> Surely they can - just treat it like any other way. > > > >> However, they >> don't treat leisure=park as a routable feature > > All routers? All areas?
My understanding is that routers just ignore the area tags completely. So as far as the router knows, so a closed way marked with highway=residential/area=yes is treated exactly the same as any other way marked highway=residential. In other words, it routes along the perimeter, and not through the area itself So allowing routing around the perimeter of an area marked leisure=park would simply require treating leisure=park the same as, say highway=pedestrian. Not that I think this is a good idea. It probably isn't. But it's certainly possible. >> - which, if all they >> know about is the perimeter, is probably a good thing. > > Eh? I thought you said you'd "love it" if it cut directly across an area?? No, I didn't. > They don't have to *follow* the perimeter just use it to find the best exit > & then join it to the entrance to the area with a straight line. > > Are you certain no routers can do that? Of course not. I'm not even certain I know of all routers that exist. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
