Closed rbanick closed 3 years ago
This doesn't make any checks for connectivity, right?
Correct.
My observation after a desk review in Bangladesh was that in BD, if an amenity=ferry_terminal
way exists, it was indeed connected. Therefore this solved my use case.
A connectivity check would make sense but I haven't dug around the code enough to understand how to build that. As things stand, ferry routes are not checked for connectivity either, so if we push for this we should apply it to both sets of features.
seem good enough to merge, and we have additional ideas to think about checking for connectivity in the future. Maybe like adding a centroid node for the ferry terminal and snapping nearby roads within a certain radius?
Ferry terminals are areas and hence ignored by the existing OSM_to_network routine. This results in ferry routes being disconnected from road or path networks they are linked to via the terminals.
The additional code converts the terminal area outline to a Linestring and integrates it into the network as a pier.
A hacky solution but probably realistic in outcome, as ferries usually involve waiting and piers are generally coded for walking.