Update hiking-mountain.brf

[maciejs]

#744

[quaelnix]

It seems to work reasonably well.

[polyscias]

I do think it is not a good idea to set the penalty for foot=use_sidepath to 10000, i.e. the same as no.

Not all Openstreetmap data is correct and especially for short segments around crossings I have seen foot=use_sidepath set incorrectly.

10000 means that brouter will never include the way, instead I suggest to set a high penalty like 100 so the algorithm will still have the option to chose it if there is foot=use_sidepath but no suitable sidepath.

Where for bicycle this is less a problem, as the fall back is pushing the bike i.e. foot with this foot change there is no fall-back.

[quaelnix]

@polyscias, I was also sceptical at first, but this change does not seem to completely remove these ways from the routing graph.

You are right, the only reason it seems to have worked well, is, that bikeaccess is usually true on such segments. Otherwise these segments would would have been removed from the routing graph, which is - as you said - not a good idea. But the solution you proposed: #745 (comment), is also problematic. I would suggest to replace:

assign accesspenalty switch footaccess 0 switch bikeaccess 4 100000

with:

assign accesspenalty switch footaccess 0 switch bikeaccess 4 switch foot=use_sidepath 10 100000

[maciejs]

@quaelnix Thank you for your suggestion, I have updated the change

[quaelnix]

@polyscias, what do you think about the updated version?