Yes I know - I list lines which actually have direction in the list or assign direction. My worries - and that changed from version to version a bit are the routes which do not matter which side they are on - but it has to be consistent and not random. Meaning if the direction of a road/line is reversed - then either reverse all other copies of that object if you can reverse them (no direction tag) or do not reverse any. However not reverse the ones that appear after the line that is reversed, but do not reverse the ones that are before in the style. Now of course I could take routes into the non reverse list. However as I display them to low resolution, this would mean a lot of lines that would have better performance and nicer looking if reverse merged, but are not reverse merged because the underlying line maybe had a oneway set and unset, or is oneway and the position of other duplicate lines of that object are in a different position in my style file. On Tue, 18 May 2021 at 01:43, Gerd Petermann < gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Felix,
If a line has a direction (which means it should not be reversed) you have to mark it as such. There is no longer any automatism which tries to guess what you want.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Montag, 17. Mai 2021 19:38 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] 4179
Oh yeah - what may not happen is the following hypothetical example
1. route=mtb (set line) (can be merged and reversed) 2. highway=x (set road - is not reversed merged - maybe because of oneway tag) 3. route=hiking (set line - however because the 2. highway was not reversed, while the 1 route was reversed - this is now using a different direction than 1).
1. and 3. while being possible to be reversed - have to be reversed identical. (because in my style mtb routes are on the right side, hiking routes on the left side). 2. can be reversed because it is in the center. I do not are if 1. and 3 are exchanged. Meaning it is fine if they are left or right, but they are not allowed to be both left or both right. So they can be reversed, but if 1. is reversed, 3 had to be reversed to. I have quite a few such cases in my style and as long as the reversing is consistent, and not dependent on the order in the style, this is fine.
e.g this could create a problem?
1. route=mtb (can be reversed) 2. highway=oneway (downhill only at high priority) [set oneway=1} continue (sometimes with, sometimes without actions) - cannot be reversed because of oneway. 3. {delette oneway if for 2. continue with actions was used I use intermediary keys to restore an actual oneway should there have been one.} 3. route=hiking (can be reversed - but if it is reversed also route=mtb has to be reversed).
On Tue, 18 May 2021 at 01:28, Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com <mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>> wrote: I meant if there is a line created with continue - and that line is on the --line-types-with-direction list, the other copies of that line Or roads should be merged too. And I think roads should be reversed and merged as much as possible to - also at resolution 24 if not oneway-1 or on the --line-types-with-direction with list. However some people may feel that is a single copy of that line is on the --line-types-with-direction list, then none of those copies should be merged at level 0, but maybe on other levels or none at no levels at all. And I also use different linetypes for roads - so highways get thinner when zooming out. I think this makes a lot of sense for secondary to highway. Not soo much for others. That is anyhow why I feel roads only exist at level 0, from level 1 onwards there are only lines, not roads.
Now for one object in OSM I sometimes create up to 10 copies - 5 due to different level, 4 for additional features and 1 invisible line that is actually responsible for routing. Having the road invisible overcomes the problem that there are few routable line types - so only solution is to make many roads invisible and only map the very common ones to a visible line type. So there is a pretty big implication on the total size if due to one of those 10 copies having the direction set or oneway set, all other 9 cannot be reversed to be merged, or not be merged at all. Also the name is not identical. E.g. I will create one line for a mtb route, another line for a hiking route. Maybe even several lines so you can see all route names. Also several copies (up to 4, previously even more but in new generation devices that lead to crashes) are routable. Also helps in merging - if you have one road for a relation that always has the same name, only at intersections with other roads this cannot be merged. While if there are maybe changes in the name tag, or other subtleties less can be merged.
I really feel merge as much as possible and consider everything a line from level 1 onwards.
On Tue, 18 May 2021 at 01:02, Andrzej Popowski <popej@poczta.onet.pl <mailto:popej@poczta.onet.pl>> wrote: Hi Felix,
then what about proposed:
For line--types-with-direction it would be best to give a resolution limit for each type, so if resolution is lower than associated lines can be reversed.
Does it means, that you accept wrong direction at lower resolution?
-- Best regards, Andrzej _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org