mkgmap and route restrictions

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

mkgmap and route restrictions

Gerd Petermann
Hi all,

looking at the 4 node restrictions I think I found a general bug in mkgmap:

Both with polish (.mp) format and with OSM data we compute the
routing nodes for which the restriction shoud be applied.
In a second step we compute the arcs between these nodes.
In this 2nd step we ignore the information about roads given with
TRAFFROADS in polish format or the from,via, and to roles in OSM data.

In the mkgmap algo, we just select the first direct arc (means: peace of road) between the nodes.
If the nodes are connected with multiple arcs on different roads, this
probably is too lazy, although it will not fail very often.

I have to rewrite most of the code reg. restrictions to correct this..

Gerd




_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: mkgmap and route restrictions

WanMil
> Hi all,
>
> looking at the 4 node restrictions I think I found a general bug in mkgmap:
>
> Both with polish (.mp) format and with OSM data we compute the
> routing nodes for which the restriction shoud be applied.
> In a second step we compute the arcs between these nodes.
> In this 2nd step we ignore the information about roads given with
> TRAFFROADS in polish format or the from,via, and to roles in OSM data.
>
> In the mkgmap algo, we just select the first direct arc (means: peace of
> road) between the nodes.
> If the nodes are connected with multiple arcs on different roads, this
> probably is too lazy, although it will not fail very often.
>
> I have to rewrite most of the code reg. restrictions to correct this..
>
> Gerd

Hi Gerd,

can you give an example?

Thanks!
WanMil

_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: mkgmap and route restrictions

Gerd Petermann
Hi WanMil,

WanMil wrote
> Hi all,
>
> looking at the 4 node restrictions I think I found a general bug in mkgmap:
>
> Both with polish (.mp) format and with OSM data we compute the
> routing nodes for which the restriction shoud be applied.
> In a second step we compute the arcs between these nodes.
> In this 2nd step we ignore the information about roads given with
> TRAFFROADS in polish format or the from,via, and to roles in OSM data.
>
> In the mkgmap algo, we just select the first direct arc (means: peace of
> road) between the nodes.
> If the nodes are connected with multiple arcs on different roads, this
> probably is too lazy, although it will not fail very often.
>
> I have to rewrite most of the code reg. restrictions to correct this..
>
> Gerd

Hi Gerd,

can you give an example?

Thanks!
WanMil
I noticed the possible error by looking at the code, I don't
have an example.
The probem may appear wherever two nodes are connected with
different roads.

Assume road r1 with nodes a,b, and c and road r2 with nodes b and c,
both are connected to road r3 with nodes c and d.
A restriction exists with from=r2 and to=r3 and via=c.
Depending on the ids of the roads, mkgmap might
create a wrong restriction using road r1 and r3.

Gerd
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: mkgmap and route restrictions

nwillink
In reply to this post by WanMil
Hi Gerd

This might be related:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/50.60751/-3.60074

If I take the maroon route I am routed correctly via Highlands Park- which is private but designation=foot
In fact its parsed correctly as it shows my blue walking sign half way.
However, if I click on Colway Lane and finish at the top left (green route), it seems to ignore foot=designation and takes a much longer route

www.pinns.co.uk/osm/images/private.jpg

HTH

nick
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: mkgmap and route restrictions

Gerd Petermann
Hi Nick,

I can't reproduce the result with r3116 and default style. The
first part of road Highlands Park
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/20138647

is forbidden for all vehicles and pedestrian!
The default style doesn't evaluate tag
designation=*
I think that should be changed.

Besides that I see no restriction relation in that area,
so it is also not related to that.

Gerd


> Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 11:23:27 -0700

> From: [hidden email]
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] mkgmap and route restrictions
>
> Hi Gerd
>
> This might be related:
>
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/50.60751/-3.60074
>
> If I take the maroon route I am routed correctly via Highlands Park- which
> is private but designation=foot
> In fact its parsed correctly as it shows my blue walking sign half way.
> However, if I click on Colway Lane and finish at the top left (green route),
> it seems to ignore foot=designation and takes a much longer route
>
> www.pinns.co.uk/osm/images/private.jpg
>
> HTH
>
> nick
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/mkgmap-and-route-restrictions-tp5800402p5800476.html
> Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: mkgmap and route restrictions

nwillink
Hi Gerd

yes, I didn't use the default style - apologies for having lead you up the 'garden path'


It does have 'designation= public_footpath' which should allow pedestrians?

Thanks for your Time

r
Nick
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: mkgmap and route restrictions

Gerd Petermann
Hi Nick,

yes, if your style allows pedestrians for designation= public_footpath ways.

With r3116 and the default style and original data I see the same long way for both start points.
When I add the tag
foot=yes
to way 20138647 I see the same short route for both start points.

Gerd

> Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 03:28:10 -0700

> From: [hidden email]
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] mkgmap and route restrictions
>
> Hi Gerd
>
> yes, I didn't use the default style - apologies for having lead you up the
> 'garden path'
>
>
> It does have 'designation= public_footpath' which should allow pedestrians?
>
> Thanks for your Time
>
> r
> Nick
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/mkgmap-and-route-restrictions-tp5800402p5800528.html
> Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: mkgmap and route restrictions

ligfietser
Nick,
designation= public_footpath is not enough, you should add foot=yes or foot=designated to the OSM data.

_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: mkgmap and route restrictions

nwillink
Thanks both of you for putting me right !

r Nick