Am 31.01.2011 21:20, schrieb Marko Mäkelä:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 08:31:09PM +0100, Henning Scholland wrote:
Am 31.01.2011 20:16, schrieb Marko Mäkelä:
On a related note, I believe that an alternative to add-pois-to-areas should be implemented, by introducing an add_poi action in the polygons style file. In that way, one could flexibly choose which polygons deserve a POI. I found an easy way to "fix" this issue. I set one Garmin-polygon-ID with a transparent image. In polygons-style-file I created as example the following rule:
shop=supermarket& building!=* [0x0D resolution 23]
For building=yes I've an extra rule. 0x0D is my transparent Garmin-ID. It works fine. Only default name should be set in the rule and not in TYP-file. Oh, you seem to have a different use case for the add_poi feature. I was thinking that I do not necessarily want to have a POI for certain areas, say, amenity=school& name!=* or amenity=parking& access=private. You seem to not want a polygon for features for which POIs are to be generated. The add_poi action would help also there: just tell mkgmap to create the POI but not the polygon. For instance, do not create a polygon for amenity=recycling or tourism=lean_to, but just the POI.
Marko Yes of cause a better implementation would help both of us. But if you want to search for a POI, it must be a node and so I need to have for some areas a node. If there is no rule for a area-tag in points-file, there wont be an node from --add-pois-to-area. Why you would like to have a POI for an object taged as node and not for a similar POI taged as polygon?
Henning