|
In SeaWorld Orlando, I see that a huge multipolygon was made out of "highway=pedestrian" lines. When asking in the normal map to go from one place to another within the park like this, it plots a route along the contour of the path or of buildings, etc. If the places aren't connected by the same line, or close enough, it tells me that a path couldn't be found between these points. Is it OK to change all these contour lines to just a normal line, and then make linear pathways along the surface where people walk? That would help in routing. |
|
For clarification, the user has made a multipolygon relation with those highway=pedestrian ways: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4667908 I think the goal was to make the walkways pedestrian areas, as mentioned on the highway=pedestrian wiki page. This is a valid method to do detailed mapping rather than linear footways. However, I'm not sure this was done in quite the right way--I'd think it'd be better to leave tagging off the actual ways, and tag highway=pedestrian, area=yes on the multipolygon relation. Have you contacted the user about this? All that said, I've heard that most routers don't deal with routing through areas very well, so I'm not sure if changing the tagging as I mention above will improve routing. You're right, highway=pedestrian should be tagged on th MP, not the ways. I've edited my answer to note that the data is partially/also at fault.
(14 May '15, 15:05)
Vincent de P... ♦
|
|
The data should be improved, but this is mainly an issue with the router software. See also the answers to this question. Routing over areas is seemingly not a trivial feature. Some routers implement the workaround that the route along the edge of areas. There are a lot of discussions on the development mailing lists of various routers, so hopefully this'll soon be a solved problem. Some mappers have taken the pragmatic step of helping the routers by adding linear footpaths in addition to the area. But in a case like SeaWorld, it could become ugly quite quickly. |
