Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 8 years ago
It seems to me, that your target lies on the opposite side of the street and
the calculated route has to reach the target from the opposite direction. If
you take a look at the attached image you can see, that the way is split into
two different ways. Could you try setting your target a bit to the right?
Original comment by veaac.fd...@gmail.com
on 6 Apr 2011 at 9:53
Attachments:
Original comment by veaac.fd...@gmail.com
on 6 Apr 2011 at 9:53
I tried to move target to be clearly on the right side, but it does not help.
Also when I moved target to the highway (about 100 to the north) - to the
correct direction (ie. north-east), MoNav still finds incredible long route
(and it ends
in right direction so the problem is not because of two parallel roads in
opposite direction)
Original comment by r0pol...@gmail.com
on 7 Apr 2011 at 9:21
Could you please post a screenshot of the route monav finds? On you n900 you
can use STRG+SHIFT+P to make a screenshot.
Original comment by veaac.fd...@gmail.com
on 8 Apr 2011 at 7:17
Here are requested screenshots - in different zoom levels.
Original comment by r0pol...@gmail.com
on 8 Apr 2011 at 4:42
Attachments:
http://www.yournavigation.org/
gives this result:
Original comment by r0pol...@gmail.com
on 8 Apr 2011 at 4:49
Attachments:
Ok, it seems it is an error with OpenStreetMap data. One part of the highway is
used in both directions and has not "oneway=yes" as a flag. Nevertheless, the
wiki states, that highways are implicitly oneway. This means MoNav is actually
correct.
I am not sure what to do about such cases. If I fix them in MoNav they do not
get fixed in OSM. If I don't fix them a lot of people might complain
Original comment by veaac.fd...@gmail.com
on 11 Apr 2011 at 3:29
Attachments:
Original comment by veaac.fd...@gmail.com
on 12 Apr 2011 at 5:45
Actually I might fix this in the future when handling implied tags correctly.
Original comment by veaac.fd...@gmail.com
on 12 Apr 2011 at 6:15
When I tried these two cases of routes (see next two screenshots),
I thing the problem is not in blue-marked line but in red-market line.
Original comment by r0pol...@gmail.com
on 13 Apr 2011 at 8:14
Attachments:
http://openrouteservice.org/index.php?start=14.2059738,50.0240529&end=14.206877,
50.0250947&pref=Fastest&lang=de&noMotorways=false&noTollways=false
shows the correct route although.
And also when I checked one-way/two-way properties of segments
in the editor, it seems to me correctly set (although I eventually might not
see what value is implied or explicit):
Original comment by r0pol...@gmail.com
on 13 Apr 2011 at 8:19
Attachments:
Your first example looks like the target is actually on the wrong lane.
Nevertheless I will have a closer look at this.
Could you point me to where i can download the monav routing module used in
your case?
Original comment by veaac.fd...@gmail.com
on 13 Apr 2011 at 8:21
And your second example works only because monav starts routing from the next
possible routing nodes, one of which is past the segment with oneyway=no".
The problem is, that monav currently assumes that a motorway is implicitly
always oneway, whatever the oneway tag actually specifies.
I will fix it in 0.3.x, but not for the 0.3 release. I wanted to implement
proper implied tags anyway.
Original comment by veaac.fd...@gmail.com
on 13 Apr 2011 at 8:26
monav I use on N900 is the monav-routing-daemon from extras-testing maemo
repository:
http://maemo.org/packages/package_instance/view/fremantle_extras-testing_free_ar
mel/monav-routing-daemon/0.2.release-2/
with source
http://maemo.org/packages/source/view/fremantle_extras-testing_free_source/monav
/0.2.release-2/
I tried also one more route test on another part of the (same) road on which
can be more clearly seen both opposite ways: It seems to me that monav "does
not know" about this way:
Original comment by r0pol...@gmail.com
on 13 Apr 2011 at 10:36
Attachments:
Maybe the street was not in the data set when it was generated. I will download
the map data and take a look at it, but not before the weekend.
Original comment by veaac.fd...@gmail.com
on 14 Apr 2011 at 7:19
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
r0pol...@gmail.com
on 4 Apr 2011 at 8:50