Hi On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 12:42:45PM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > 22 May 2019, 09:53 by f...@zz.de: > > Hi Marc, > > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 10:38:23PM +0000, marc marc wrote: > >> > What is the expectation to get navigated to when selecting a park? > >> there is no such thing as "a single point that makes everyone agree" > > Yes there is - there has to be an explicit location you will ne navigated > > to for a certain feature. > > > This is blatantly untrue. Depending on location you will prefer to be routed > to different entrances and it is not considering different modes of transport.
How can i select the entrance on OSRM/openstreetmap website, MAPS.ME, OsmAND the entrance? You cant. And where is an entrance to a Golf Course? And when navigating by car to a mall i dont want the entrance - i want the Car park. Can i select that from a drop down when selecting a Mall to navigate to? Mapping OSM Objects to navigational locations is implicit right now and depends on the algorithm used to find the nearest location on the routable network for the specified mode of transportation. So i bet i can generate a situation where OSMAnd, OSRM and MAPS.ME will bring you to different spots more than 5km apart. Its just a matter of constructing the right geometries with the tags one or the other navigational preprocessing takes into account. You cant specify the right location explicitly - so you need to rely on implicit geometry processing by algorithms. And then you still have 2-3% of broken destinations. > > Nope - there isnt enough information. Its all just implicit and works > > for 95% of the cases. It breaks horrible in others and we fake > > geometries to fix it, blame the application, invent tags to guide the > > nav/routing which only fit half of the object and only half of the > > apps support. In all cases the user is in trouble. > > > Please give a specific example. See my School example. Its a pretty nice fuck up. You get "near" the School but in a oneway maze 1km away from the parking lot. And yes - there is a footway. Everything is mapped as it is. Still - breaks. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-May/045416.html https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-May/045423.html And dont troll me with "add a footway" - A footway is not in the routable graph for cars and will not even be in the database when looking for the nearest point. > If navigation is simply doing nearest road point on matching then it requires > change to both > - properly use footway data > - use your proposed relation footway != car And it wont solve the issue. See the school example. There is a footway and it will prefer the location it does not most likely. Still broken. nearest road point will only be on roads for THAT mode of transportation. > I see no reason for preferring second solution. Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de UTF-8 Test: The 🐈 ran after a 🐁, but the 🐁 ran away
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
