highway=no is used for routing

[hgcvm]

I noticed that the fast profile (perhaps others as well) use a highway=no for routing.

An example of highway=no can be found here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/835341884

The tag highway=no is used to indicate there is no road or path here. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=no

(in this specific case, it's used for cycling highways that are supposed to be there one day, but planning and construction has not yet started)

[polyscias]

Yes, support for highway=no is missing, the usage is quite low so no surprise it is missing.

Easy to add support for it, see #403

[polyscias]

I thought it was easy to add support but I see that requires an update of lookups.dat so I dropped the pull request.

[polyscias]

Did have a look at some Brouter suspects today and found a problem with a way that was tagged using access="no @ (2022 Feb 12-2022 March 14)". That is not correct, conditional access should be tagged with access:conditional=. The question is however why brouter is evaluating the access="no @ (2022 Feb 12-2022 March 14)" at all.

This issue is in that regards the same as highway=no (in way context) for this issue, both are not part of looksup.dat.

In the profile_developers_guide you can find:

if the data contains a value that is not contained in the lookup tables (but its key is known) that value is treated as unknown

and unknown is encoded as literally unknown in the .rd5 files, you can test in the profile on it using =unknown.

With the trekking bicycle profile the value of the highway key is not for really checked for bicycle access, only highway=motorway|motorway_link|proposed|abandoned are forbidden, highway=no gets the default cost of 2.

For the car-vario profile the "problem" is that for the access key only the values yes|permissive|designated|destination give access, everything else including unknown means no caraccess

[afischerdev]

At some point there will be an update to lookups.dat.
I thought it might be a good idea to try this:

highway;0000002942 abandoned disused razed demolished dismantled no

The low cost way. But I have seen 'abandoned' is used in hiking.brf and walking.brf as walkable.

[polyscias]

Good idea to add highway=no to highway=abandoned|disused|razed|demolished|dismantled

If the hiking/walking profile are already routing over "abandoned" I see no big problem that is also done for highway=no.

[mfaure]

Here is another case. A bridge with access=no OSMID=107701263; bridge has been destroyed and is being rebuild (work is lasting for 6 months). This broken bridge is not taken into account by BRouter.

This case is symbolic as when using a bicycle you have only two options : either follow a highway with 10'000 vehicules a day, or
follow a 25km-long diversion (!)

Pleas find a photo attached.

Hope this helps fixing this bug :)

[polyscias]

I thought it might be a good idea to try this:

highway;0000002942 abandoned disused razed demolished dismantled no

That patch is part of #458 so once that gets checked in this problem will be also fixed.

[matkoniecz]

Though avoiding highway catchall would be even better: instead of listing exceptions, allow routing only on known list of valid highway= values