Hi WanMil, I have no idea what a carpool lane is, so I can't say how it should be handled. Anyway, reg. the original source code (looking at trunk version 2748) : 1) I think it is very confusing that StyledConverter and RoadDef store the bits regarding access with inverted meaning. StyledConverter has an array called noAccess, so a true should mean "no access", while RoadDef names the array ACCESS. 2) StyledConverter evaluates access=carpool AND mkgmap:carpool=*. access=carpool just sets the corresponding bit, while mkgmap:carpool=1 (or =true, =yes) also set the other access bits. I don't know if anybody is using this special mkgmap:carpool tag, I'd prefer to remove it. Regarding the source mergeroads branch (r2753) : I think the code tries to evaluate access=carpool in the way the trunk version would evaluate mkgmap:carpool. That is probably not intended. Gerd
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2013 00:27:39 +0200 From: wmgcnfg@web.de To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Subject: [mkgmap-dev] mergeroads - Handling of mkgmap:carpool
I've changed how the mkgmap:carpool flag is handled. It is no longer handled as common access flag, which means the new actions add/setaccess no longer set the mkgmap:carpool flag. There was a problem with such a rule: access=yes { setaccess yes } It classified the road as carpool which means it can only be used for carpools, emergencies and busses...
This is the handling now: The no carpool bit (0x0008 see RoadDef) is set except mkgmap:carpool is set to yes. (In this case all other mkgmap:xxx access flags are set to no - except emergency and bus which are set to yes).
@All: Is the carpool bit handled correctly?
How can I test?
Shall the extra handling (automatic setting of all other mkgmap:xxx access flags) should still be used? I think this could better be done by the style developer? Example: carpool=yes { set mkgmap:carpool=yes; setaccess no; set mkgmap:emergency=yes }
@Programmers: Shall we remove the carpool bit from the common access flags and add a separate method setCarpool(boolean) to the RoadDef class like it is done with the throughroute, unpaved etc. flags? I find it quite irritating to have carpool in the common access bits.
WanMil _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://lists.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev