Hi Gerd see embedded answers Regards Ticker On Sun, 2019-01-06 at 09:11 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi Ticker,
I think I understand the changes in the points file and in inc/accesss_country and they look okay to me. I agree that it is better to have the hotel POI for those cases where a point has both amenity=restaurant and tourism=hotel.
In polygons I don't understand some of the changes. Dubious to me are those for - aeroway
aeroway=runway/taxiway/taxilane are rendered as 0x27="Runway" lines unless they have area=yes, in which case they are rendered as 0x0e="Aircraft Road" polygons. Circular (ie closed ways) taxiways are a well defined concept and shouldn't need area=no. This handling seemed to fit with some of the examples I looked at.
- shop now being rendered at res 24 instead of 22. Why?
I changed this because most shops are at the same scale as building/cafe/restaurant, which are at res 24. I don't have a strong opinion on this.
- highway=pedestrian
Not sure what you are asking here. The most significant change was to render as routable lines regardless of being closed/multipolygons/area tag. (ie giving square/plaza edge routing). The other changes were to continue but avoid any possible highway mop-up so that always get to 'polygons' and there render as square/plaza unless area=no (but have this rule after place=square rule)
- the rule highway=* & (area=yes | mkgmap:mp_created=true) [0x05 resolution 22] was removed. In Italy and probably other countries as well I see many highway=residential + area=yes or highway=service+area=yes as an alternative to map place=square (which is quite new)
This rule is wrong in many ways! It generates a "Parking Lot" as a highway=* mop-up. There shouldn't be a difference in the handling of polygons derived from multiPolygon or simple closed ways. I added the explicit: # other highways that have area=yes are probably parking lots, eg services/rest_area (highway=services | highway=rest_area) & area!=no [0x05 resolution 22] but, from a recent post, it is thought that highway=services is better treated as a retail area and I plan to do this in a future change. If you think other highway types (ie service/residential) that have area=yes should also generate a square/plaza then I'm happy to include this.
Most of the changes in lines look OK to me. - I don't like all the changes reg. area, see also Lorenzos comment.
Are you referring to area= changes other than highway=pedestrian as per Lorenzos comments? Just seen Greg's comments and maybe the answer is to annotate the rule when it trying to do the best with bad data.
- I think highway=access_ramp is equivalent to highway=footway, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Access_Ramp
I can't remember the example I looked at but it seemed more like a service road. However, as there is this proposal, I'll change it to footway.
- not sure why you set bicycle=no for highway=trail?
This tag is not well defined, but its wiki page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrail says should not assume that it cycleable
- You see tmp:stopMopUp=yes in some rules but the rules that would evaluate that tag are commented. I'd rather remove all.
Although the rules that test it are commented, one is a diagnostic to show unhandled highway= and the other is the one that generates a routable line. Although the opinion seems to be that these shouldn't be shown, I feel strongly that they should and will continue to do so on my maps. If other people want the same they just uncomment the line.
Gerd