Re: [OSRM-talk] Using custom data

2015-10-16 Thread Sander van Tulden
Hi Matthias, Perhaps a relevant Github issue about (simple) custom data with OSRM: https://github.com/Project-OSRM/osrm-backend/issues/1321 Best regards, Sander Op 16-10-15 07:39 heeft Matthias Loeks geschreven: >Hi Frederik, > >thanks that's a good point indeed.

Re: [OSRM-talk] Using custom data

2015-10-15 Thread Emil Tin
Are you sure segments are connected at the noded? Sendt fra min HTC-telefon - Reply message - Fra: "Matthias Loeks" <matth...@loeks.net> Til: "osrm-talk@openstreetmap.org" <osrm-talk@openstreetmap.org> Emne: [OSRM-talk] Using custom data Dato: tor, ok

[OSRM-talk] Using custom data

2015-10-15 Thread Matthias Loeks
Hi list, I'm running a little experiment with using custom geo data for OSRM. Following the advice of [1], I converted my data to OSM XML format, for now neglecting all kinds of tags/attributes etc. (this could be done later). You can find the resulting OSM file here:

Re: [OSRM-talk] Using custom data

2015-10-15 Thread Matthias Loeks
g"<osrm-talk@openstreetmap.org> Emne: [OSRM-talk] Using custom data Dato: tor, okt. 15, 2015 13:19 Hi list, I'm running a little experiment with using custom geo data for OSRM. Following the advice of [1], I converted my data to OSM XML format, for now neglecting all kinds of tags/attrib

Re: [OSRM-talk] Using custom data

2015-10-15 Thread Matthias Loeks
Hi Frederik, thanks that's a good point indeed. I guess I did not mean "noding" in a strict sense which also creates nodes at bridge intersections etc, but rather the "simple" noding that Daniel described. However, probably there could also be nodes in OSM at the same coordinate but on

Re: [OSRM-talk] Using custom data

2015-10-15 Thread Frederik Ramm
Hi, On 10/15/2015 05:43 PM, Matthias Loeks wrote: > I though OSRM, clever as it is, would do the noding itself and not just > rely on the OSM data. That would be very un-clever of OSRM because in OSM the topology has a meaning. In OSM, if two roads cross but don't have a common node, then