Just trying to get foot directions from A to B like this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=53.38595%2C-6.06060%3B53.38579%2C-6.05996#map=16/53.3829/-6.0541&layers=N

The route sends you the whole way around rather than the short direct route like car or bike: https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_car&route=53.38595%2C-6.06060%3B53.38579%2C-6.05996

I added a sidewalk the whole way along there but it hasn't helped. Any idea what's wrong?

Thanks.

asked 10 Oct, 04:07

ciaranodc's gravatar image

ciaranodc
1114
accept rate: 0%

meta: I see you also have created a note on the map ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1955318 ). Please do not post the same question on two places in the OSM ecosystem, just one place at a time (or at least prove cross links between both locations), since it creates additional work.

(10 Oct, 06:34) aseerel4c26 ♦

Also car traffic is sent a long detour: https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=53.386%2C-6.0606&point=53.385872%2C-6.058563&vehicle=car&weighting=fastest&elevation=true&use_miles=false (I have moved the marker a bit to make it more obvious - if the marker is closer to the gate graphhopper just does not extend the route until the end (I guess it assumes one can walk the rest of the car-impassable street).

Cause: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6018406754 is a gate (even explicitly tagged "access=no" on the road (since nearly a year). Do you know this place? Is there no gate on the road, but just on the stairs leading to the north? Then remove the gate from the road way and just put it into the small stairs way.

After you have done a change, please note: in the left collapsed info section on the graphhopper page you see: "Import date: 2019-09-28T19:42:46Z". It uses the osm data of that date - you need to wait until the new osm data is processed.

permanent link

answered 10 Oct, 06:32

aseerel4c26's gravatar image

aseerel4c26 ♦
32.1k16239551
accept rate: 18%

edited 10 Oct, 06:35

@aseerel4c26 "Is there no gate on the road, but just on the stairs leading to the north?" I am almost sure that is the case. It is a few years since I have been there, but it is a popular signposted walking route, and as far as I remember also a public residential road for vehicle access. I would guess that as you say the gate is wrongly placed on the shared node and should be on the steps only.

(10 Oct, 08:58) alan_gr

As an aside, I notice you upgraded this section of Balscadden Road from residential to tertiary. This is a dead end for vehicles - it seems unusual to classify it as tertiary which tends to imply some sort of connecting role (beyond simply connecting to houses).

And you have added a sidewalk as a separate way along part of Balscadden road. But it doesn't seem to connect to anything at the eastern end, which risks breaking pedestrian routing. You are relying on the router to understand that the pedestrian can "jump" from the sidewalk to the adjoining street, which it may or may not do. If the path ends here I would suggest connecting it to the street. Personally I find mapping sidewalks separately quite difficult to get right. If there is no barrier between the path and the street I'd be more inclined to map this by tagging the existing street: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sidewalk But there are divergences of views among mappers on this issue.

But to emphasise: the original problem here is the gate, not anything to do with sidewalks or road classificaton.

(10 Oct, 09:25) alan_gr
3

Fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/75497748 , there is lots of mapillary imagery there so a total no-brainer.

(10 Oct, 09:27) SimonPoole ♦

In the JOSM editor you can DownLoad data and check Imagery from Maxar, Esri and Bing. You can also view all Public GPS traces in that downloaded area : File=>Download data=>Slippy map=>Download from OSM=>Data Sources and Types=>Check OpenstreetMap data and Raw GPS data. I agree with SimonPoole Gys

(10 Oct, 12:09) Gys de Jongh
1

Hello. Thanks for the replies. No there is no gate on the road in real life.

@SimonPoole, thanks for your fix. It is not working yet but I just have to wait right?

@aseerel4c26 , I see the import date. So once that date becomes a date after we made the changes it should work? Any idea how long that usually takes?

@alan_gr, thanks for the suggestions. I added the footpath to try and get the directions to be able to go along that road. I put the road back to residential as it was before and connected the end of the footpath to it but should I just delete the footpath altogether?

@All, thanks again for your help. I'm new to this so am learning but will get to know it and become a decent contributor in time hopefully!

(10 Oct, 21:22) ciaranodc
2

That's right ciaranodc you will just have to be a bit patient. In the standard map : https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/53.38560/-6.05974 the gate is still on the road. In my experience it takes about 1 day for these simple edits to become visible in the standard map. Maybe a day longer in Graphhopper.

(10 Oct, 21:54) Gys de Jongh

@ciaranodc: correct. You see the current import date is already ~10 days ago. Some months in the past this graphhopper instance only needed about 1-2 days to update, but its update cycles seem to have slowed down. I would expect it to have fresh data available in the next few days, though.

Thanks for your help!

(11 Oct, 06:51) aseerel4c26 ♦

@ciaranodc I am reluctant to say "delete the footpath" as it true that there is a sidewalk here and I like to see pedestrian infrastructure being mapped. But as an example of how mapping separate sidewalks can get complicated, look at the route relation for the Howth Cliff Walk https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/450291 . It still contains the street, not the new footpath. Same with the Bog of Frogs loop. So maybe these should be changed, and changing route relations can be tricky in itself. Also it is now unclear if pedestrians can cross to Kilrock Road from the sidewalk, and if the sidewalk has the same name as the street. I would be inclined to delete the footpath and instead give the same information by adding sidewalk=left to the section of the existing street (note that "left" here refers to the direction the way happens to be drawn in OSM, not to anything in the real world).

That's just a personal preference though, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sidewalks for an introduction to the two broad approaches for sidewalk mapping. To be clear, I am talking here only about situations where a pedestrian can freely step from the sidewalk to the road at any point.

(11 Oct, 11:12) alan_gr

That edit has replicated through now :).

(13 Oct, 21:48) ciaranodc
showing 5 of 9 show 4 more comments
Your answer
toggle preview

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:

×140
×34
×32
×19
×8

question asked: 10 Oct, 04:07

question was seen: 248 times

last updated: 13 Oct, 21:48

powered by OSQA