RestrictedValues Destination

Hi,

I just came across this issue. A user complained that a way was routeable that was tagged with vehicle: destination e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/29462517

I think we should add this as well, shouldn’t we?

Best,
Robin

A minor addition, but I didn’t want to create a new Discussion for it. The same user also complained about a way to be routeable that is tagged wit multiple resctriction values agricultural;forestry;destination. But we do not split by ;. Should we consider doing this?

Here is the Way: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/29296108

We should not allow routing through such ways and just adding this would mean we would allow this. Instead we should make them very low priority.

Hmmh, how common is something like this?

If we add this to the restricted values these ways will be not routeable using that FlagEncoder. So if we add destination to the restricted values should fix it?

Mhm hard to guess, maybe 1% of all access restrictions are concatenated like this. Here are some examples:
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/motorcar#values
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/motor_vehicle#values
http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/vehicle#values

Tagging like this seems to be a german thing :smiley:
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/eb4
// These are actually a lot, so I only used a very small map part
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/eb6
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/eb5

What do you mean here? Is destination already allowed and we need to restrict it?

In my opinion we should add destination here to the restrictedValues:

Oh, indeed … did you stumble over a routing problem due to this? Would be interesting to have a real world problem where a destination way is preferred

Yes, but only with my curvature weighting. Both ways I posted above were used in different routes.

Ok, we need to fix this with the next release.

Looks like this has not been fixed yet.

https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=47.407993%2C8.327293&point=47.420654%2C8.389435&locale=en-US&vehicle=car&weighting=fastest&elevation=true&layer=Omniscale

Stumbled uppon this behaviour because of https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/505504

Thanks for bringing this up to our attention again. Would you mind to open an issue to avoid this gets lost again?

And do you think completely blocking the roads is a proper fix or should we just put a big penalty on this?

1 Like

Completely blocking would be wrong. All residents and their visitors would no longer to be able to get to the intended destinations. Not a nice move :wink: If a destination can only reached through such roads then the route is allowed.

You can use this test case to test if the penalty is high enough. If the route is short then the penalty was too low.
https://graphhopper.com/maps/?point=47.414803%2C8.343365&point=47.415427%2C8.34712&locale=en-US&vehicle=car&weighting=fastest&elevation=true&layer=Omniscale

PS: The penalty should not simply be applied to such roads but only when you change from an unrestricted to a destination restricted road. Like a turn or traffic light penalty. Once you are in the zone there is no longer any penalty penalty. If I understand it right it does not mater if getting out of the destination zone has a penalty or not.

1 Like

Backlink: It is issue #733

1 Like