-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.5k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Discards construction and proposed ways, resolves #4230 #4258
Conversation
only thing i can think of is construction=no... is that a thing? |
features/car/construction.feature
Outdated
| primary | | | x | | ||
| construction | | | | | ||
| proposed | | | | | ||
| primary | primary | | | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
construction=primary is unorthodox. usually it's construction=yes
Yes, there are a couple tags like |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you also update the taginfo.json
file? Please cherry-pick to the 5.9
branch after the merge.
Added negative tags and taginfo items. Cherry-picked into 5.9 branch. |
Routing on proposed ways was blacklisted only for car profile. This adds the same blacklisting also for foot and bike profiles. It looks like this behavior was added in Project-OSRM/osrm-backend#4258 and then accidentally reverted when pull request with title "profiles api v2" at Project-OSRM/osrm-backend#4072 was merged. This commit restores the original change for bike and foot profiles.
For #4230: discards
highway=construction
,highway=proposed
,construction=
,proposed=
.http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:construction
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:proposed
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway
I see no reason we ever want to route over these tags. Please correct me if I'm wrong or if there are any edge cases I haven't thought of. Better to be safe than sorry here.
cc @emiltin @1ec5