You should have a look at osm-help (highway=path#Usage_as_a_universal_tag) first. The way you edit crossings will not allow routing to function at all. I noticed that you change valid and correkt tagging - without propper comment. Furthermore you have broken two multipolygons, which I subsequently mended. You have not shown any willingness to learn from your misstakes as a newbie. If this conntinues I will most certainly report this as an abuse.

Here; it's broken (osm.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=57.70149%2C11.94311%3B57.70136%2C11.94376). The joy lasted only for a week or so. No other change other than duration on way.

Nice! Still no routing with OSRM. But the routing (GraphHopper) for foot-passengers is now broken :-(. No tampering detected. Might that be the result of duration on way? GraphHopper routing for bicyles and motor vehicles still ok.

As you may have already guessed, the blue lines represent ferry-lines without route-relations and the lilac with.

Ferry-lines in which area? Here are the lines which are tagged "route=ferry" in kattegat and Skagerrak (https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/NqH) Press "Run".

Genom detta changeset har du förstört multipolygonen för riverbank.

access

Sedan kan det vara bra (som ett allmänt tips) att känna till detta (access=*#Transport_mode_restrictions). Det hela är mängdlära. Bicycle ingår i vehicle-gruppen. Du förstår säkert. Den dagen du taggar en access-inskränkning kan du göra detta intelligent med t ex motor_vehicle=no/destination istället för att skriva (som en del felaktigt gör) acess=no+foot=yes+bicycle=yes+horse=yes.

Ja, jag såg det; redan dagen därpå var det klart. Jag letade förgäves efter noder med surface=*. Snyggt!

I see; intressting. They apply Lua? I am doing some ConText, which also applies Lua. Well would it not be wise to test this first? Do append the way with duration, will you. Let us keep in touch, untill this works flawlessly. By the way I have not yet started my competing ferry-line (I illustrated this earlier). :-) So this should be the fastest route.

Hej, jag infriar mitt löfte med det samma. Vägar (highway) har vissa default-värden. Läs detta, så förstår du varför du inte behöver tagga bicycle=no på highway=footway (osm.wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions#Default).

Du åsätter nästan samtliga områden som du ritar in som "park". Vänligen gå igenom introduktionen för nybörjare (osm.wiki/Sv:Beginners%27_guide).

Jag lovar!

I would very much like to know it myself, why OSRM doesn't work here. I have pondered upon that a good deal, but have not come to any sensible conclusion. Please inform me asap if or when you have any idea.

Routingen fungerar inte med footway=crossing (bortse från OSRM, de kör efter en annorlunda algoritm). Gör det enkelt med en nod i korsningen mellan vägenstigen med highway=crossing. Jämför:

A.) (footway=crossing) - fungerar inte: osm.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_bicycle&route=57.79022%2C13.42664%3B57.78972%2C13.42633#map=18/57.79060/13.42719

B.) (node med highway=crossing) - fungerar: osm.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_bicycle&route=57.80168%2C13.41173%3B57.80170%2C13.41231#map=19/57.80153/13.41202

Jag kan inte finna att footway=crossing (även med tillägg bicycle=yes) kan användas vid kombinerad gång-/cykelstig.

Se:

A) footway=crossing

B) crossing=*

I have no hope though that this (routing ok) will persist. Soon someone will insert bicycle=yes or something else. Last time routing was ruined was when a user inserted a bridgeway between ferry-route and land in Gothenburg. All routing information is in the two ferry-route-relations. The way (way/693547643) is clean from any routing-information. You will notice this when zooming in to terminal-building in Gothenburg and shifting from routing GraphHopper between foot (which goes through terminal-building) and vehicle or bicycle which goes through landing-bridge. This information is in route-relations only. So this works like a beauty.

Det har jag påstått hela tiden. I givet fall bör segregated dock vara yes, beroende på om delningsstrecket på skylten går vertikalt eller horisontalt. Sen får du kolla med övergångsställen (jag har påpekat detta för dig tidigare). Enl min uppfattning - jag kan har fel - så bör inte kombinerade gång-/cykelstigar förbindas med footway=crossing vid övergångsställen. Sistnämnda tagg kan - enligt min mening - bara användas för att koppla ihop sidewalks.

I spent a lot of time to get routing correct again. Routing with GraphHopper (foot, vehicle & bicycle) is perfect. Routing for passengers (foot) even through terminalbuilding (indoor) and gangway in Gothenburg! Routing with OSRM does not work.

Jag har skickat denna länk till dig tidigare (i samband med att du började editera): highway=path#Usage_as_a_universal_tag