Foot routing on construction road

[jeraminl]

I have a weird situation that probably stemmed from inconsistent OSM tagging itself.
Here is a road in Singapore that is supposedly closed for construction.

The Way: Loyang Avenue (749974790) is a road under construction. The way has a tag for sidewalk included.

however, there is Way: 894451438, which is already tied to the side walk

The question is, is there a way for the engine to not use the construction road (749974790) for walking? Driving avoids the road just fine, but for some reason walking still includes it.

I have OSM way id encoded, will this allow me to make a custom model like if osm_way_id == 749974790 then priority = 0?

[easbar]

There are multiple tags that play a role. The FootAccessParser would normally accept every road using a sidewalk tag:

graphhopper/graphhopper/blob/4ce025e50e4c4a160e511f9dc14eb13c9ed28136/core/src/main/java/com/graphhopper/routing/util/parsers/FootAccessParser.java#L139-L143

even when highway=construction. However, we do not accept sidewalk:left/right currently (which might be debatable). However, there is also the foot=designated tag for way 749974790 which means it will be accepted for the foot profile. The corresponding code is in ConditionalTagInspector:

graphhopper/graphhopper/blob/4ce025e50e4c4a160e511f9dc14eb13c9ed28136/core/src/main/java/com/graphhopper/routing/util/parsers/FootAccessParser.java#L126

So it comes down to the priority between the tags highway=construction, sidewalk:right/left, foot=designated, i.e. when the highway is ‘under construction’ does it mean that it should be avoided or is impassable for pedestrians?

I have OSM way id encoded, will this allow me to make a custom model like if osm_way_id == 749974790 then priority = 0?

Yes, this should work.