- mkgmap-dev - The mkgmap lists

Splitter Error
by Ralf Kleineisel 15 Sep '09

15 Sep '09

Hi, when I try to split a OSM file which contains only contour lines made with srtm2osm (1.8.14.10) I get this error: [splitter-r83]$java -Xmx2048M -jar splitter.jar --mapid=21000001 --mixed=yes --cache=./cache/ --max-nodes=50000 srtm_test.osm Time started: Tue Sep 08 20:03:15 CEST 2009 mapid = 21000001 mixed = yes cache = ./cache/ max-nodes = 50000 Checking for an existing cache and verifying contents... No suitable cache was found. A new cache will be created to speed up the splitting stage Map is being split for resolution 13: - area boundaries are aligned to 0x800 map units - areas are multiples of 0x1000 map units wide and high Processing srtm_test.osm Exception in thread "main" java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 14 at uk.me.parabola.splitter.Convert.parseDouble(Convert.java:163) at uk.me.parabola.splitter.OSMParser.startNode(OSMParser.java:137) at uk.me.parabola.splitter.OSMParser.startElement(OSMParser.java:98) at uk.me.parabola.splitter.AbstractXppParser.parse(AbstractXppParser.java:42) at uk.me.parabola.splitter.Main.processOsmFiles(Main.java:334) at uk.me.parabola.splitter.Main.processMap(Main.java:323) at uk.me.parabola.splitter.Main.calculateAreas(Main.java:225) at uk.me.parabola.splitter.Main.split(Main.java:132) at uk.me.parabola.splitter.Main.main(Main.java:91) The file is rather small, just 1x1 deg, 165 MB. Any ideas?

6 19

Commit: r1189: Remove the priority setting from the GType.
by svn commit 15 Sep '09

15 Sep '09

Version 1189 was commited by steve on 2009-09-13 17:12:34 +0100 (Sun, 13 Sep 2009) BRANCH: style Remove the priority setting from the GType. It should be associated with the rule, so that we can order the rules before running them. Add some tests for the ordering rules that I expect to implement.

4 4

Commit: r1194: add test for picking rules that match entirely on generated
by svn commit 14 Sep '09

14 Sep '09

Version 1194 was commited by steve on 2009-09-14 10:26:15 +0100 (Mon, 14 Sep 2009) BRANCH: style add test for picking rules that match entirely on generated tags.

1 0

Commit: r1193: The push/pop stuff is not needed anymore (and in fact
by svn commit 14 Sep '09

14 Sep '09

Version 1193 was commited by steve on 2009-09-14 10:03:27 +0100 (Mon, 14 Sep 2009) BRANCH: style The push/pop stuff is not needed anymore (and in fact wasn't for a long time). Add another test to make sure.

1 0

Commit: r1192: 1. Don't put the rule list into the map every time
by svn commit 14 Sep '09

14 Sep '09

Version 1192 was commited by steve on 2009-09-14 00:02:34 +0100 (Mon, 14 Sep 2009) BRANCH: style 1. Don't put the rule list into the map every time 2. Get rule formatting to work better again. 3. Add missing copyright header.

1 0

Commit: r1191: Rules are now run in the order they occur in the file
by svn commit 13 Sep '09

13 Sep '09

Version 1191 was commited by steve on 2009-09-13 23:24:47 +0100 (Sun, 13 Sep 2009) BRANCH: style Rules are now run in the order they occur in the file in all cases. What currently does not work is attempting to match a tag that was set earlier and that did not exist on the element.

1 0

Commit: r1190: Now the rules are tagged with their position in the file so they
by svn commit 13 Sep '09

13 Sep '09

Version 1190 was commited by steve on 2009-09-13 22:13:26 +0100 (Sun, 13 Sep 2009) BRANCH: style Now the rules are tagged with their position in the file so they can be ordered. Nothing actually orders them yet so nothing much will work.

1 0

access times?
by Valentijn Sessink 13 Sep '09

13 Sep '09

Hello list, There's a street in the center of my town where access is forbidden on thursday and saturday. Now there seems no good way to enter such information in Openstreetmap (but that's a wholly different discussion). The reason I'm writing here is: do Garmin maps have a way to encode time-dependent access schemes? And, if yes, does mkgmap? (And if yes still, is there a way to use this information - as OSM is lacking it currently?) Best regards, Valentijn

2 1

Commit: r1188: Better description of the --description option,
by svn commit 13 Sep '09

13 Sep '09

Version 1188 was commited by steve on 2009-09-13 16:34:25 +0100 (Sun, 13 Sep 2009) Better description of the --description option, pointing out its use in splitter too. -Valentijn Sessink

1 0

The splitter and relations containing relations
by Chris Miller 13 Sep '09

13 Sep '09

I've just noticed that there isn't any support in the splitter for relations that contain other relations, even though it is permitted by OSM. This means that a relation won't be written to a tile if it contains other relations from that tile but no nodes or ways from that tile. I'm still a bit of an OSM newbie so aren't sure how often this is likely to occur or what the consequences are if these relations are lost. I'm not aware of anyone having mentioned it before now, so I guess it's not too serious a problem? Or is it something peopl have just been living with (possibly without even realising)? Anyway, I think I can add support for this without too much additional overhead (though recursive relations, and links through 3 or more levels of relations, makes things a bit trickier) so I'll add it to the todo list. Chris

1 0