routing should respect the to
members of a turn restriction
#2004
Comments
Author: David Dean gosmore currently does have support for some restriction relations, but I don't think it can currently handle restrictions with ways as the via. If your restriction is a simple no_*_turn with from and to ways and a via node it should work. |
Author: David Dean Some details on the operation can be gleaned from this thread: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/routing/2008-August/000387.html |
Author: David Dean David Groom wrote: Here is turn restriction relation I created http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/30772/history last edited on 8 June |
Author: David Dean OK, I've had a look at the code in gosmore, and it turns out that the So as gosmore currently stands, this would have to be changed to a Ideally it seems that the angle of the turn should have no impact on the restriction, and it should only be determined by the |
Author: grand.edgemaster[at]gmail.com In short, the original implementation of restriction handling in gosmore was no-brained and crazy, since it ignored the tagging spec? |
Author: dmgroom Replying to [comment:5 grand.edgemaster[at]gmail.com]:
I suspect that rather than "no-brained and crazy" it was more a case of the original Gosmore routing being developed before the current relation tagging came into practice. |
Author: nroets[at]gmail.com In 2008, I created a file called routingTest.osm for testing gosmore (or any other routing software). Routing around the outside is the desired behaviour. My interpretation was then that the angle should be considered and gosmore passed the test at that time. I recently changed the file so that angles are no longer considered and changed only_* from being a restriction to an enforcement. I changed gosmore and it now passes the test. Everything is in SVN. |
Reporter: dmgroom
[Submitted to the original trac issue database at 8.24am, Monday, 29th June 2009]
Gosmore currently ignores relation = restriction when calculating the routing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: