|
Hi all, I recently added some turn restrictions. All seem fine apart from http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6168859 a restriction=no_entry relation. Although documented in the wiki (which I was following), none of the common routers seem to understand it. Have I made a mistake somewhere or is it just not recognised by routing software? Am I better off replacing it with no left/right turn relations? Thanks for your help. |
|
According to you relation Union Street is effectively a oneway street, isn't it? In that case a oneway tag is enough, no relations are required. Apart from that, your relation seems to be correct. First I thought it contains an error because there are two members with the role from. But according to the turn restriction wiki page no_entry suports multiple from-members. However it is quite likely that most routers don't support this relation since it is not very common. Thanks for your reply. It's effectively one way for through traffic, yes, but it isn't signed as a one way street (ie. traffic already on the street can legally travel in either direction). I was unsure about how best to map this and the no_entry relation mentioned in the Wiki seemed like the most accurate. Would using left/right turn restrictions or mapping it as if it were a oneway street be better?
(30 Apr '16, 16:02)
ACS1986
1
Personally I would map it as a oneway street. Either by adding the oneway tag to the whole street if it applies to the whole street, or just to a short part right before Friagate if this does better reflect reality. Also keep in mind that most routers will take a couple of days until having updated their data.
(30 Apr '16, 16:23)
scai ♦
1
I did leave it a few days before checking how the routers behaved. The other turn restrictions I did at the same time now route correctly. In view of your advice I'll tag a short part as one way as that seems preferable. Thanks.
(30 Apr '16, 16:44)
ACS1986
|
