Hi, ok, my understanding of the "mkgmap:set_unconnected_type=none" feature was that it allows to remove unconnected roads, while "mkgmap:set_unconnected_type=0x?" could be used to mark a road as unconnected. The way it is used in r2707 means the road is not added to the road network, but overlays might still show up in the map. I don't mind to keep this solution. Gerd
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 03:55:13 +0200 From: extremecarver@gmail.com To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit: r2707: Don't complete remove an unconnected road.
I cannot understand the difference of the patch....
In any case, I consider if "continue" is used, and remove unconnected road, then only the unconnected road should not be put into the map - afterwards the object should be treated as if it hadn't been "touched" yet.
Future roads shouldn't be removed, as maybe there is an use object xx if unconnected for future roads. In effect I believe if remove unconnected =yes is given plus continue, it is like setting the whole line/command "#". On 22.09.2013 18:08, Steve Ratcliffe wrote:
On 22/09/13 07:57, GerdP wrote:
I think the original code worked as designed, please see http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/2013q2/017976.html OK I can see that in the case you were responding to that makes sense.
It all depends on whether continue is being used to create an overlay which is to be considered a part of the underlying road, or a separate line. In the first case it makes sense to remove the line too, and in the second it doesn't.
Since Felix filed both bugs, I think he should take a look at both cases and think about which behaviour he would like to see ;)
..Steve _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://lists.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://lists.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev