Re: [OSM-talk] Road Surface Type Map

[Maarten Deen]

On 2015-06-18 04:23, Hans De Kryger wrote:

Does anyone know of a map that displays road surface type? If not
maybe it been a good idea to request one from itomap. It would be a
lot of help to mappers who map those tags.


Itomap has one: 



Regards,
Maarten

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Road Surface Type Map

[Warin]

On 18/06/2015 12:23 PM, Hans De Kryger wrote:
Does anyone know of a map that displays road surface type? If not 
maybe it been a good idea to request one from itomap. It would be a 
lot of help to mappers who map those tags.





OSMAnd has a function to display road surface... it does display the difference 
between asphalt, concrete and unpaved.. I don't know about others.

Umm arr .. configure map>Details>show road surface .. it also has road quality, 
access restrictions ... and more.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Road Surface Type Map

[Hans De Kryger]

Does anyone know of a map that displays road surface type? If not maybe it
been a good idea to request one from itomap. It would be a lot of help to
mappers who map those tags.

*Regards,*

*Hans*


*http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13
*

*Sorry for any misspellings*
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-ko] OSM and CartoDB in use for MERS mapping

[Hong, Yongmin]

Well, It is especially notable since it was created while S.Korea gov
refused to publish the name of medical facilities. Then someone got the map
data from OSM and analyzed the known facts (somehow), then created the page
with the map.

ps. I see my contribution, too! (I created a node which is now identified
as MERS-infected.)

--
Revi
https://www.revi.pe.kr
-- Sent from Android --
2015. 6. 17. 오후 1:06에 "Andrew Errington" 님이 작성:

> Sorry, slight correction.  It's a map of medical facilities, not cases.
> Apologies for any alarm caused.
>
> Andrew
>
> On 17 June 2015 at 12:18, Andrew Errington  wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> You may have heard of the MERS situation in Korea.  A map of cases and
>> their location has been published here:
>>
>> http://issue.visualdive.co.kr/mers/
>>
>> I am pleased to see that OSM is the background layer (I recognised some
>> of my work).  It's notable because Korea does have very good map coverage
>> from Google, and local companies Daum and Naver, so there are several
>> sources to choose from.  It's possible that it was chosen due to the fact
>> that that webpage needed to show statistics outside Korea, which Daum and
>> Naver does not cover.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>
>
> ___
> Talk-ko mailing list
> talk...@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ko
>
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Response to discussion about OSM and local mappers article

[Erica M Hagen]

I’m really glad to see all this discussion sparked by my post, which I have 
enjoyed reading. I’m sorry I wasn’t on this list to reply directly to many 
posts. (My article is here in case you did not see 
https://medium.com/@ricaji/openstreetmap-mapping-power-to-the-people-e938c38da93d
 
)

First of all, I did not title the article “arguments against remote mapping” 
for a reason. It’s not my axe to grind. Someone said the article is more “for” 
local mapping than against remote which is true. My background is in 
international development and that is how I’ve approached the possibilities of 
OSM as well. There are plenty of times when remote mapping is a good thing... 
The question for me is more about how to prioritize and distinguish when and 
where and how to integrate this so that it increases the profile and abilities 
of local groups in a real way. Someone said, we don’t want to exclude mappers 
because of poverty - that’s what I’m talking about.

There are quite a few parallels in development/aid work where foreigners tend 
to organize things for locals when they should be listening/ allowing local 
leadership more. That’s where I’m coming from. 

The growing efforts by HOT and Missing Maps and others are a very positive 
development, I do not mean to imply otherwise. But while something like Missing 
Maps may have a 50/50 intent, but the realities of international development 
and humanitarian work are such that it requires a lot more effort/resources for 
one 50 than the other, and with a lot less reward in terms of funding or public 
attention. As such, we need to generate much more support for, discussion of, 
and thinking around this process of engaging, organizing, supporting, funding, 
maintaining the interest of local mappers (while outside mappers are playing 
the supporting role that they should) in order to help them gain a higher 
profile and leadership. That to me is a broader membership discussion I’d 
rather see than arguing about remote mapping. It is also an opportunity since 
there is a spotlight on the remote volunteer mappers lately. They’re also 
looking to learn and understand far away places.

Someone wrote: "We need to encourage local mapping, but large-scale disasters 
create a need for immediate maps, which, in some cases, means outside help is 
needed.” This is true. But with such large scale disasters comes funding for 
mapping in other places which still has the needs of the international 
community as its focus. There’s an inevitability to the process and how it’s 
done which seems a bit premature. To me it’s important to keep up the variety 
and creativity as well as critical thinking about how we approach difficult 
topics like mapping with very vulnerable people.  I was also hoping to 
highlight the longer term community building needed and talk about that. I’m 
not sure if OSMF is the right place to bring this or not, and if not, where?

Well, I like a good debate, so I’m happy to see this and also to talk to anyone 
about any of this so feel free to contact me directly!

 
___
Erica Hagen 
GroundTruth Initiative 
+1 773 313 5782 
 Map Kibera   |  OpenSchoolsKenya 
   
Check out my new talk from TEDxGateway here! Mapping the Slums 

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] getmap in osm mode

[Paul Norman]

On 6/17/2015 10:41 AM, Daniel Koć wrote:
getmap works with so called public static image APIs, which are 
provided by Mapquest and Google. AFAIR, OSM does *not* provide such 
an API - at least at last time I checked. But, I've read that OSM now 
provides direct routing. If they would also provide an static image 
API, ... ;-)


So what about that "public static image APIs" - do we have it (or will 
we some day)? 


OSM doesn't provide APIs except the editing API*. The routing on osm.org 
is from third-party providers using OSM data. I believe MapQuest Open 
has a static image API like MapQuest.com, except using OSM data 
globally. That would probably be very easy for them to implement, as it 
would basically reuse their existing MapQuest code.


There is the /cgi-bin/export endpoint on the tile servers, but that is 
not suited for an application like this.


* And arguably tile.osm.org
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Some thoughts against remote mapping

[Eleanor Tutt]

On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 4:07 AM, moltonel 3x Combo 
wrote:

>
> What I've been mulling over is the "home location" data on the
> profile. Right now it's close to useless. I'd like to be able to set
> multiple areas (not points) and rate them "can survey / good local
> knowledge / particularly interested".
>
>
^^^ This is an excellent idea and a feature I would definitely use.

Also, this thread is of great interest to me, but I'm entering it quite
late and many points have already been discussed. I'll just say a few
things:

1)  I am thankful to Erica Hagen for her original post, as I think these
are critical things to think about.

2)  Hagen's point that "there are degrees of local that we are failing to
account for" reminds me of many discussions I've had in my own community
about what it means to be "from a place," whose voices are viewed as
representative of a neighborhood, who has access to power, etc. While much
of the discussion here has been in the context of
international/humanitarian mapping, these same questions play out on a
micro scale in cities and neighborhoods. It is worth thinking about who is
mapping in your own community and whether you are working to involve
neighborhood residents, do offline outreach, etc. at home.

Thanks,
Eleanor
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Florian Lohoff]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 05:55:18PM +0100, Philip Barnes wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-06-17 at 09:00 +, Janko Mihelić wrote:
> > If you ask me, they are all in their infancy. Non of these routing
> > services even route right. In a turn restriction the "via" role can
> > be a way. Neither OSRM, ORS or GraphHopper knows how to restrict
> > that, and that's IMHO one of the crucial parts of a routing engine.
> > When one of them starts routing right, than we can talk about picking
> > a winner service. Right now only MapQuest knows how to route.
> > Janko
> The other common thing that is missing from routing instructions is
> support for mini-roundabouts, tomtom certainly don't do this so it is
> something that OSM routing could pull ahead on.

mini_roundabouts are a clear mis-design in OSM - I avoid and dont use
them at all. There is no way without heavy preprocessing that a router
can create a circular path from a point/node.

Instead we should have had a tag which states that the center of the
roundabout can be ridden/driven over.

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de
 We need to self-defense - GnuPG/PGP enable your email today!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Florian Lohoff]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 09:00:37AM +, Janko Mihelić wrote:
> If you ask me, they are all in their infancy. Non of these routing services
> even route right. In a turn restriction the "via" role can be a way.
> Neither OSRM, ORS or GraphHopper knows how to restrict that, and that's
> IMHO one of the crucial parts of a routing engine.
> 
> When one of them starts routing right, than we can talk about picking a
> winner service. Right now only MapQuest knows how to route.

There is no such thing as a perfect routing engine. Every engine can be
brought to its knees with some cluefully choosen endpoints.

I am thankfull that we have the multitude of routing engines. At work
i am using OSRM for calculating distance for telecoms infrastructure for
which i am tuning the OSM dataset and calculate like 500K routes in a
couple of minutes.

On the mobile i am switching between OSMand and Mapfactor Navigator, but
all of them refuse to route into a track even if its grade2 and your
destination is at that track -> FAIL.

Routing home from work with mapquest gives me a route which is not that
bad but can be beaten by 20% less travel time from a local. Thats just
because everybody in this town knows that certain traffic lights are
synced in a tricky manner. You cant put this into OSM.

When looking at the bike route the route of mapquest is 1.5miles longer
(4.6 -> 6.2miles) than the Car route although there are cycle tracks in
the map along ALL roads taken. There is even a shorter route using tracks
in the wood but mapquest does not use them for bikes it seems.

So a quick test with carefully chosen endpoints produces less then
optimal solutions for ANY routing engine.

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de
 We need to self-defense - GnuPG/PGP enable your email today!


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] getmap in osm mode

[Daniel Koć]

Out of curiosity - there is a "getmap" TeX package:

http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/getmap

which can put the maps directly from the net using just the address. 
Currently it uses Google Maps and MapQuest, but not the other OSM maps 
we have, so I asked the author of getmap and here's what he reply to me:


getmap works with so called public static image APIs, which are 
provided by Mapquest and Google. AFAIR, OSM does *not* provide such an 
API - at least at last time I checked. But, I've read that OSM now 
provides direct routing. If they would also provide an static image 
API, ... ;-)


So what about that "public static image APIs" - do we have it (or will 
we some day)?


--
"The train is always on time / The trick is to be ready to put your bags 
down" [A. Cohen]


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Some thoughts against remote mapping

[Clifford Snow]

This Friday night I'm going to close out the quick, three question survey
on remote mapping thread. If you haven't answered the survey already, go to
 https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TRQYHFP to answer the three questions.

Clifford

On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 06/15/2015 09:55 PM, john whelan wrote:
> > Perhaps we need something like the HOT validation system in OSM more
> > generally but I don't know how it would work.  Locally OSM mappers have
> > used a rich range of tags, I'd say about 25% other than highways didn't
> > get rendered for one reason or another when they were initially tagged.
>
> On the German forum and mailing lists, occasionally newbies will pop up
> and say "I've mapped this and that, could somebody have a look if
> everything is correct?"
>
> Perhaps it could be as easy as setting a changeset tag "review=yes
> please", and then a small web site listing changesets that have this tag
> and don't yet have a review discussion entry or something, so
> experienced mappers could look if there's something in need of review in
> their area.
>
> I'd be very careful to make sure this is voluntary; even a hint at a
> possible *mandatory* review process will immediately have everyone
> pointing out where this has got Google ;)
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>



-- 
@osm_seattle
osm_seattle.snowandsnow.us
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Philip Barnes]

On Wed, 2015-06-17 at 09:00 +, Janko Mihelić wrote:
> If you ask me, they are all in their infancy. Non of these routing
> services even route right. In a turn restriction the "via" role can
> be a way. Neither OSRM, ORS or GraphHopper knows how to restrict
> that, and that's IMHO one of the crucial parts of a routing engine.
> When one of them starts routing right, than we can talk about picking
> a winner service. Right now only MapQuest knows how to route.
> Janko
The other common thing that is missing from routing instructions is
support for mini-roundabouts, tomtom certainly don't do this so it is
something that OSM routing could pull ahead on.
Phil (trigpoint)___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Michael Reichert]

Hi,

Am 2015-06-17 um 05:33 schrieb Hans De Kryger:
> Why do OSRM & OpenRoutingService compete against each other instead of
> joining resources and combining efforts to make the best routing service
> out there? Am i missing something?

There are differences in history between these two projects. ORS
(OpenRouteService) is a project started by University of Heidelberg as a
closed-source project in 2010 (?). It was dead between 2012 and 2014,
i.e. no data update, no bugfixing because it is a university project.

Open Source Routing Machine (OSRM) was started by Dennis Luxen who
gained a PhD at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology. Afterwards he worked
for Mapbox which now contributes much to OSRM.

Summarized: OSRM is a commercial open source project and ORS is a
university project.

Best regards

Michael




-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2015-06-17 16:27 GMT+02:00 Lester Caine :

> On 17/06/15 04:33, Hans De Kryger wrote:
> > Why do OSRM & OpenRoutingService compete against each other instead of
> > joining resources and combining efforts to make the best routing service
> > out there?




as far as I understand these 2 services use different algorithms, where
OSRM is very fast in calculating and guarantees the best route (according
to the map data), ORS can handle multiple means of transport much cheaper
(e.g. bike routing, truck routing, foot routing) and has features like
avoid area which I don't know if OSRM does offer.

Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Dave F.]

OSMR requires a link to centre on a desired location so they can start a 
new route, not load an existing one.


I'm aware of 'zoom to user' but that shares location data. Many people 
don't like doing that.


Unless I'm missing something, the 'generate link' you describe doesn't 
zoom to the route.


Dave F.

On 17/06/2015 15:08, Patrick Kilian wrote:

Hi,


In theory competition drives functionality improvements, although in
this case it's not clear if this happened. Any map based website that
doesn't include a permalink option isn't worth using, Unless it's been
recently added & is very well hidden OSMR hasn't this option.

OSRM has the option to "Generate Link" at the top right of the box
containing the route description (i.e. quite visible in my opinion) and
has had that as long as I used their service (so not too recent). It
even offers to put the link into a QR code for you.

Patrick "Petschge" Kilian

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Lester Caine]

On 17/06/15 04:33, Hans De Kryger wrote:
> Why do OSRM & OpenRoutingService compete against each other instead of
> joining resources and combining efforts to make the best routing service
> out there? Am i missing something? I know it's nice to have different
> services for different uses but this doesn't seem like a good use of
> resources at all. I may be the only one with this opinion, but this has
> bug me for awhile.

Normally I advocate against lots of duplication as there are lots of
examples where several projects are all competing for the same developer
pool, but here I tend towards a little diversity allows alternate
algorithms to be explored. There are problems with all of the current
set of routing engines and no one has the full solution. I'm stuck with
OSMAND most of the time on the satnav, but have to ignore it's
recommended routes locally as they are simply wrong. Last time I played
with OSRM and ORS in parallel both produced different routes with some
common inaccuracies. There is still enough work that needs finishing for
a number of engines to co exist. When they all start producing the same
'perfect' answer then it may be time to merge some? But what is perfect
for one user may be wildly wrong for another ...

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Patrick Kilian]

Hi,

> In theory competition drives functionality improvements, although in
> this case it's not clear if this happened. Any map based website that
> doesn't include a permalink option isn't worth using, Unless it's been
> recently added & is very well hidden OSMR hasn't this option.

OSRM has the option to "Generate Link" at the top right of the box
containing the route description (i.e. quite visible in my opinion) and
has had that as long as I used their service (so not too recent). It
even offers to put the link into a QR code for you.

Patrick "Petschge" Kilian

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Dave F.]

In theory competition drives functionality improvements, although in 
this case it's not clear if this happened. Any map based website that 
doesn't include a permalink option isn't worth using, Unless it's been 
recently added & is very well hidden OSMR hasn't this option.


On 17/06/2015 04:33, Hans De Kryger wrote:
Why do OSRM & OpenRoutingService compete against each other instead of 
joining resources and combining efforts to make the best routing 
service out there? Am i missing something? I know it's nice to have 
different services for different uses but this doesn't seem like a 
good use of resources at all. I may be the only one with this opinion, 
but this has bug me for awhile.


*Regards,**
*
*Hans*
*
*
*http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13 


*
*
*
*Sorry for any misspellings*





---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Dave Nesbitt]

> Can someone who actually works with commercial navigation data say if
> "via ways" have an equivalent in their systems?

TomTom and HERE data both have restrictions that are comprised of multiple
via edges (ways). At MapQuest, my team and I integrated these restrictions
into the routing engine and when we imported OSM data the logic to handle
these complex restrictions was already in place - that is why MapQuest
supports them. Now at Mapzen, we are developing an open source routing
engine (Valhalla: https://github.com/valhalla). We have not yet implemented
these complex restrictions but plan to in the coming months. The logic is
not simple and can complicate what might otherwise be a clean design. I
think the number of these complex restrictions is low in OSM, but often
they represent important cases.

-- 
David Nesbitt
d...@mapzen.com
443-206-1819
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Maarten Deen]

On 2015-06-17 15:08, Michał Brzozowski wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar  
wrote:

Imagine a single-carriageway road crossing a dual-carriageway road.
All turns are allowed except u-turns from one side of the
dual-carriageway to the other. This common situation can only be
modeled using a turn restriction with a via way.

Now if the via way had to be split for any reason, then you have
multiple via ways.


Isn't the restriction type (no_u_turn, no_left_turn, no_right_turn)
basically just for display purposes? Because given from, to and via it
only matters whether it's no_* or only_*.

The solution I think is going to give correct routing would be to make
a no_u_turn where one of the carriageways is from, the node at
intersection is via and that small connecting segment is to.


No, because then you also restrict left (or right, in LHD countries) 
turns.


Imagine this situation (ASCII art):

+--6--8--1--+
  |
  2
  |
+--5--9--3--+
  |
  4
  |
  +

Driving from way 1 to way 3 is not allowed (U-turn). Making a turn 
restricting from  way 1 to way 2 via node 8 prohibits driving from way 1 
to way 4 also. You have to make a restriction from way 1 to way 3 via 
way 2.
I think you are right in saying that the type of restriction is only for 
display and has no real purpose for the router.


Maarten

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] [Talk-us] README tag with editor support

[Paul Johnson]

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Richard Welty 
wrote:
>
> so i have two things in mind here:
>
> 1) formalize the README tag as a way to caution future mappers
>
> 2) request editor support, when someone goes to change a
> README tagged entity, it would be nice if editors would popup
> a dialog saying something along the lines of
>
> Warning: read the following before making any changes to this
> object 
>
> other suggestions that have been made have included trying to
> make the dates on which imagery was collected more obvious,
> adding warnings when edits are newer than available imagery
> (or newer than the imagery layer currently being displayed),
> and pressing to get more current imagery into place.
>
> does anyone have any thoughts on how to approach this?
>

Sounds like a cross between why OSMBugs was named Notes when it was
integrated into OSM, combined with a need for better tracking of categories
of notes, which is something I rather liked from Mapdust.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Michał Brzozowski]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar  wrote:
> Imagine a single-carriageway road crossing a dual-carriageway road.
> All turns are allowed except u-turns from one side of the
> dual-carriageway to the other. This common situation can only be
> modeled using a turn restriction with a via way.
>
> Now if the via way had to be split for any reason, then you have
> multiple via ways.

Isn't the restriction type (no_u_turn, no_left_turn, no_right_turn)
basically just for display purposes? Because given from, to and via it
only matters whether it's no_* or only_*.

The solution I think is going to give correct routing would be to make
a no_u_turn where one of the carriageways is from, the node at
intersection is via and that small connecting segment is to.

Michał

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[phil]

On Wed Jun 17 13:47:31 2015 GMT+0100, Michael Reichert wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Am 2015-06-17 um 14:38 schrieb Eugene Alvin Villar:
> > This has been fixed in Osmand early this year after being reported
> > more than 2 years ago. Unfortunately, multiple via ways are still not
> > supported.
> 
> I wonder if a via way instead of an via node is necessary so much. I
> wonder more where someone /really/ needs multiple via ways. Can you call
> examples for multiple via ways (link to relation)?
> 
One example that cannot be done with a node.
http://osm.org/relation/2653875

Phil (trigpoint)
-- 
Sent from my Jolla
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

Imagine a single-carriageway road crossing a dual-carriageway road.
All turns are allowed except u-turns from one side of the
dual-carriageway to the other. This common situation can only be
modeled using a turn restriction with a via way.

Now if the via way had to be split for any reason, then you have
multiple via ways.

On 6/17/15, Michael Reichert  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 2015-06-17 um 14:38 schrieb Eugene Alvin Villar:
>> This has been fixed in Osmand early this year after being reported
>> more than 2 years ago. Unfortunately, multiple via ways are still not
>> supported.
>
> I wonder if a via way instead of an via node is necessary so much. I
> wonder more where someone /really/ needs multiple via ways. Can you call
> examples for multiple via ways (link to relation)?
>
> Best regard
>
> Michael
>
>
> --
> Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
> ausgenommen)
> I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)
>
>

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Michael Reichert]

Hi,

Am 2015-06-17 um 14:38 schrieb Eugene Alvin Villar:
> This has been fixed in Osmand early this year after being reported
> more than 2 years ago. Unfortunately, multiple via ways are still not
> supported.

I wonder if a via way instead of an via node is necessary so much. I
wonder more where someone /really/ needs multiple via ways. Can you call
examples for multiple via ways (link to relation)?

Best regard

Michael


-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

This has been fixed in Osmand early this year after being reported
more than 2 years ago. Unfortunately, multiple via ways are still not
supported.
https://code.google.com/p/osmand/issues/detail?id=1729

On 6/17/15, Janko Mihelić  wrote:
> If you ask me, they are all in their infancy. Non of these routing services
> even route right. In a turn restriction the "via" role can be a way.
> Neither OSRM, ORS or GraphHopper knows how to restrict that, and that's
> IMHO one of the crucial parts of a routing engine.
>
> When one of them starts routing right, than we can talk about picking a
> winner service. Right now only MapQuest knows how to route.
>
> Janko
>
> sri, 17. lip 2015. 05:34 Hans De Kryger  je
> napisao:
>
>> Why do OSRM & OpenRoutingService compete against each other instead of
>> joining resources and combining efforts to make the best routing service
>> out there? Am i missing something? I know it's nice to have different
>> services for different uses but this doesn't seem like a good use of
>> resources at all. I may be the only one with this opinion, but this has
>> bug
>> me for awhile.
>>
>> *Regards,*
>>
>> *Hans*
>>
>>
>> *http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13
>> *
>>
>> *Sorry for any misspellings*
>>  ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>>
>

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Michał Brzozowski]

This was bothering me, too. But aren't we expecting too much? I guess
that via ways could be not that easy to implement for all but the
simplest cases (where it can be reduced to via nodes, anyway - like no
U-turn on a double carriageway which intersects with a
single-carriageway road).

Can someone who actually works with commercial navigation data say if
"via ways" have an equivalent in their systems?

We can't live in our idealistic world if it means that implementations
can't easily deliver proper solution. This indirectly backfires on our
crediblity, whether we like it or not. If it were that easy, then at
least some (more than 1 and few obscure) routers would have supported
via ways.

Routing is one of the areas where errors aren't tolerated and you will
get all this "OSM is shit" from people. If Google, TomTom and HERE can
sort it out, why can't we?

Michał


On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Nick Whitelegg
 wrote:
>
> Depends what you're after really. I'm impressed by GraphHopper's job in
> suggesting a foot route between Southampton and the village I spent my
> teenage years, 60km away - it actually suggests a route very close to the
> one I would have chosen myself. A bit more roads than ideal, but it is
> impressive.
>
>
> 
> From: Janko Mihelić 
> Sent: 17 June 2015 10:00
> To: Hans De Kryger; OpenStreetMap
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications
>
>
> If you ask me, they are all in their infancy. Non of these routing services
> even route right. In a turn restriction the "via" role can be a way. Neither
> OSRM, ORS or GraphHopper knows how to restrict that, and that's IMHO one of
> the crucial parts of a routing engine.
>
> When one of them starts routing right, than we can talk about picking a
> winner service. Right now only MapQuest knows how to route.
>
> Janko
>
>
> sri, 17. lip 2015. 05:34 Hans De Kryger  je
> napisao:
>>
>> Why do OSRM & OpenRoutingService compete against each other instead of
>> joining resources and combining efforts to make the best routing service out
>> there? Am i missing something? I know it's nice to have different services
>> for different uses but this doesn't seem like a good use of resources at
>> all. I may be the only one with this opinion, but this has bug me for
>> awhile.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Hans
>>
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13
>>
>> *Sorry for any misspellings*
>> ___
>> talk mailing list
>> talk@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Jean-Marc Liotier]

On 17/06/2015 05:33, Hans De Kryger wrote:
Why do OSRM & OpenRoutingService compete against each other instead of 
joining resources and combining efforts to make the best routing 
service out there? Am i missing something ? I know it's nice to have 
different services for different uses but this doesn't seem like a 
good use of resources at all.


This is a recurring question in all free software. Whereas, in a market 
segment's maturity, network effects come to overwhelm centrifugal 
forces, in earlier phases there are distinct advantages to diversity. 
Not only does diversity offer faster exploration of the solution space, 
but it also affords greater resilience against organizational stresses.


Also, focusing resources of a single project might not improve the 
end-user outcome: software quality is only partly correlated to resource 
allocation, especially for small projects and early stages where quality 
in the core development team is paramount.


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Nick Whitelegg]

Depends what you're after really. I'm impressed by GraphHopper's job in 
suggesting a foot route between Southampton and the village I spent my teenage 
years, 60km away - it actually suggests a route very close to the one I would 
have chosen myself. A bit more roads than ideal, but it is impressive.



From: Janko Mihelic 
Sent: 17 June 2015 10:00
To: Hans De Kryger; OpenStreetMap
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications


If you ask me, they are all in their infancy. Non of these routing services 
even route right. In a turn restriction the "via" role can be a way. Neither 
OSRM, ORS or GraphHopper knows how to restrict that, and that's IMHO one of the 
crucial parts of a routing engine.

When one of them starts routing right, than we can talk about picking a winner 
service. Right now only MapQuest knows how to route.

Janko

sri, 17. lip 2015. 05:34 Hans De Kryger 
mailto:hans.dekryge...@gmail.com>> je napisao:
Why do OSRM & OpenRoutingService compete against each other instead of joining 
resources and combining efforts to make the best routing service out there? Am 
i missing something? I know it's nice to have different services for different 
uses but this doesn't seem like a good use of resources at all. I may be the 
only one with this opinion, but this has bug me for awhile.

Regards,
Hans

http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13

*Sorry for any misspellings*
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Routing Applications

[Janko Mihelić]

If you ask me, they are all in their infancy. Non of these routing services
even route right. In a turn restriction the "via" role can be a way.
Neither OSRM, ORS or GraphHopper knows how to restrict that, and that's
IMHO one of the crucial parts of a routing engine.

When one of them starts routing right, than we can talk about picking a
winner service. Right now only MapQuest knows how to route.

Janko

sri, 17. lip 2015. 05:34 Hans De Kryger  je
napisao:

> Why do OSRM & OpenRoutingService compete against each other instead of
> joining resources and combining efforts to make the best routing service
> out there? Am i missing something? I know it's nice to have different
> services for different uses but this doesn't seem like a good use of
> resources at all. I may be the only one with this opinion, but this has bug
> me for awhile.
>
> *Regards,*
>
> *Hans*
>
>
> *http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/TheDutchMan13
> *
>
> *Sorry for any misspellings*
>  ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk