Hi
Rule rules; + way.addTag("mkgmap:closed",String.valueOf(way.isClosed())); + way.addTag("mkgmap:autoclosing", "false");
I don't much like the idea of adding two tags to every single way.
+ // the way may be closed automatically because both endpoints are outside the bbox + // set a tag so that these ways can be ignored in the style rules + way.addTag("mkgmap:autoclosing", "true");
It seems to me that setting this is all that is required. It will only affect relatively few ways, and you can test for tag existence rather than having to know/remember if you should test against 'true', 'True', 'yes', '1' or whatever.
The two tags needn't be a memory problem just by changing a few other things (I will post a patch within the next days). Anyhow we could decide to set mkgmap:closed=true and mkgmap:autoclosing=true only. I think mkgmap:closed might make sense to have a chance in the lines style to skip an element. I don't have a good example but there are some tags that can be used for lines and polygons.
But apart from that, the main thing is that any rule that uses this will still be guessing -- what if it really was a polygon? Then you will have a missing area of water.
I aggree!
I think we can do better though. We can know if the way really is closed even when all its nodes are not included, since the first and last <nd ref="..."> values will be the same for the first and last points in the way.
Currently we ignore any node ref in the way for which there is no actual node coordinates during parsing, but we could keep track of the node id's and compare the first and last ones when the way is created. Then a flag could be set on the way, to say that it is definitely closed and you would no longer have to guess.
Sounds good. I supposed that splitter removes the node refs for all nodes not contained in the tile. If that's not the case your idea is much better than the patch.
The information that the way is incomplete might be worth saving too.
Then 'is_closed()' might be a good candidate for a style function?
Yes - and is_inpomplete() :-) At the moment I do not make good progress in the style-functions branch. Steve, do you think it's ok to merge the current implementation which requires that a function cannot be used on its own? Otherwise the optimizer removes the function-only-rule.
..Steve
WanMil P.S.: I am happy if you merge the style-include branch! Good work!