well for me it's a bit more complicated, because I often run checks on the set values (and whether they were set because of physical inabilities or legal). Therefore I already run one set of alternative name scheme for access values - but the branch meant I needed to ammend/change about 500 lines of code. If it was only about changing the access value it would have been easy, the problematic part was that simply replacing bicycle= and bicycle!= was impossible due to other keys which would have conflicted - so I ended up manually going through everything using CTRL-H reading each line before changing - instead of CTRL-H and "change all"... the fact that private would mean yes made it even more difficult - as I had quite a few checks for & bicycle=private or bicycle!=private that needed to be replaced with an alternative keyscheme (and hencefort adding a check for each of them further down the lines file)... On 04.10.2013 20:16, Henning Scholland wrote:
Hi, I'm simplifying these things just in the beginning for all needed cases. Eg.
bicycle=designated | bicycle=official {set bicycle=yes} bicycle=private | ( access=private & bicycle!=yes) { set access=no }
and so on. If you'll need the original values, you can use a namespace. But I only care about "Are bicycles allowed or not". Don't know if you do the same. So in the end of this process all ways with common access-tags have an access=yes or access=no. These two values are used in the style afterwards.
Henning