On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:54:02PM +0200, Colin Smale wrote: > On 2020-05-24 23:16, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote: > > > Can you give an example of such untaggable restriction? > > In the UK there are many small roads signed as "Unsuitable for HGVs." > Legally you are allowed to drive your 44T truck down there, but you will > almost certainly get stuck. How do we tell the router?
width? maxwidth? It a different attribute than legalese which makes it unsuitable - so tag it appropriate. > There are also many roads signed as "No HGVs except for access." It is > tempting to tag them as "hgv=destination" but that doesn't cover the > case where you are allowed to follow that route for many miles and make > several turnoffs IF you "need access". The current definition of > "access=destination" doesn't allow routers to distinguish between truly > "first/last segment only" and "its fine if you are going to/from this > general area". > Discussion here shows the > http://www.trucknetuk.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=140446 Thats a technical difficulty in the OSM Data model which may fill pages. At least in Germany a restriction sign is not a "linear restriction" e.g. is restricting the whole way. Instead you may not traverse the point of the sign. We are currently unable to put this into OSM. A workaround is to put 2 short oneways on top of each other - one of them carrying the restriction - which is in itself a pretty ugly solution - and - this does not work for destination. There are other problems. A destination technically is currently solved by increasing the "cost" in the routing graph. So for example for every meter on a destination road you may travel 20m on others. Which most of the time works pretty well in avoiding the destination roads. It has pretty bad side effects which causes the router to try to send you out of the destination area with the shortest way even producing very long diverts around. Legally this is broken. Legally you may not enter the zone when your destination is not within that zone and there nothing like a distance based penalty within that area. So yes - there is a problem - But not within tagging. Its something routers need to solve. > And then there are all the subtle differences in the semantics of the > vehicle classes, but that's a whole different can of worms... Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de UTF-8 Test: The 🐈 ran after a 🐁, but the 🐁 ran away
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
