CoMaps

870 readers

51 users here now

Cooperative community open-source fork of Organic Maps, an offline privacy-respecting not-for-profit OpenStreetMap GPS app for your phone.

CoMaps website

founded 7 months ago

MODERATORS

zyphlar@sopuli.xyz

oleg_rswll@sopuli.xyz

What keeps routes away from residential areas? (piefed.ee)

submitted 1 week ago by Tuuktuuk@piefed.ee to c/CoMaps@sopuli.xyz

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I can see that my CoMaps does not route through houses' yards. And, if the route either begins or ends at a yard, it does allow crossing there.
So, it is respecting some OSM tag. What tags are those that cause the routing to avoid residential yards?

For example, a route from 60.219, 25.065 to the metro station at 60.224, 25.076 is routed straight through the yard of a school with 7-year-old pupils, which is really not okay during school hours. The school's yard is marked as an area of type School Grounds, but of course many schools where it is no problem at all to walk through their areas can have the same feature... So, what are the tags that cause the routing algorithm of CoMaps/Organic Maps/Maps.me to avoid houses' yards? What tags can I add to the school yards in OSM in order to prevent routing through them?

top 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] walden@wetshav.ing 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I would consider adding the tag access=private (more detail here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access). If you want to dig deeper and set hours for when it might be acceptable to walk through there, you could probably accomplish that with a conditional restriction https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Conditional_restrictions but then the problem is "does CoMaps respect conditional tags". I don't know the exact answer to that, but my AI slop answer is that it should respect access=private, but if you make it conditional (add times, etc.) CoMaps won't respect those limits.

If I'm looking at the place you're thinking of, the route that goes through the school yard is of the type "driveway". Since you're familiar with that area, you could keep it as a driveway or change it to something more accurate.

Keep in mind once you update OSM, CoMaps will only include it during their next cycle which I think corresponds to app updates.

[–] Tuuktuuk@piefed.ee 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

access=private
``` is a bit incorrect in a place that has no signs whatsoever prohibiting access. That might the least incorrect solution in any case. What would be nice would be to find some other solution that would really coincide with the physical reality of that place. But yeah, I could ask on the OSM forum what they think about using access=private in such places.
 
And yeah, I've already noticed most of that road is definitely not a driveway. I'm going to check where the driveway really ends and at least turn most of that into a footpath. But of course, footpath will still be used for routing.

[–] walden@wetshav.ing 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Good point, I see that in the definition of access=private.

In Google street view there is a sign which to me appears to support access=private. Maybe you can visit in person to confirm. https://maps.app.goo.gl/cPwdin7944UKLykx7

Edit: On the other side of campus, those signs only prohibit cars and motorized vehicles, so maybe there's no restriction on pedestrians.

[–] thomas@friendica.bytebox.nohost.me 1 points 1 week ago

@walden

but if you make it conditional (add times, etc.) CoMaps won't respect those limits.

CoMaps has been supporting this for a few months now.
codeberg.org/comaps/comaps/pul…

[–] pastrami@sammich.es 5 points 1 week ago

access=destination will forbid through traffic while still allowing the route if it is explicitly the destination (.i.e. routing to the school). I use it in places a way might be "technically" optimal for a route but clearly incorrect, such as on corner parking lots near traffic stops.