Hello again, As I was studying my previous topic here, I discovered that OSRM is now supporting two undocumented tags, by HOT's request: impassable=yes and status=impassable ( https://github.com/DennisOSRM/Project-OSRM/commit/99e9d0d0230789b24df656435a4245edb57b4dac). I believe the HOT team is using OSRM for emergency aid, so this may have been an urgent request.
>From the documented life cycle approaches ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Comparison_of_life_cycle_concepts), what OSRM was requested to support seems to correspond to the 1st (<status>=yes) and the 4th (life_cycle=<status>) approaches. Yet, the last time I talked about life cycle here (2013-09-28, on abandoned hiking trails), I felt that the 3rd approach (<status>:<key>=<value>) had most support. This guide encourages the former method (4th approach): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Damaged_buildings_crisis_mapping As well as encouraging 2 special life cycle tag values to the "building" tag (damaged and collapsed), so far still undocumented. They may be doing so in order to work around having to adapt their rendering engine, which is quite understandable given the urgency of their work. The 3rd approach would suggest using damaged:highway=[value] (which would make routers work correctly, but not renderers as they currently are) instead of highway=[value]+status=impassable (which makes unmodified renderers work perhaps "well enough" but requires routers to adapt). Any thoughts? -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 "The speed of computer chips doubles every 18 months." (Moore's law) "The speed of software halves every 18 months." (Gates' law)
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
