Dear group I am quite new to mkgmap, so may be I missed something obvious. Please dont rip my head off. My ambition is to generate a single routable map (no overlays) optimized for bicycle use. I'd like to have all official bike routes clearly visible. If a secondary road is part of an official bike route, I would still like it with the rendering type of a bike route. The problem is that the way http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/28596614 is rendered as a road even that it is part of a bicycle route. Beneath the road type is my assigned bicycle type. So it visible, but not as clearly as I wish. I tried to 1. move the rule to the very top of the line stylefile, no success 2. add the element definition to the relation rule, no success 3. assign the draw order of the bike route type in a typ editor to a draw order above all others, no success. Finally I found the following block in uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.reader.osm.HighwayHooks: // what we have here is a highway with a // separate track for cycles -- to enable // bicycle routing, we synthesise a cycleway // that has the same points as the original // way makeCycleWay(way); if (way.getTag("bicycle") == null) way.addTag("bicycle", "no"); mkgmap synthesises a new way exactly above the existing one. It seems to me that the newly generated way is drawn above the one with the type I like. I commented these three lines and tada! it worked. The comment suggests that the routing will not work any longer as expected. I didnt test on my device (gpsmap62) but with BaseCamp and Activity Bicycling it seems ok. Mmmmh..... What I dont understand: Why do we have to add a complete way to support routing? We never now which one comes first or second so that the finally rendered type is unpredictable. To be honest: I dont now. Should the tag altering/mapping not be covered by the rules in the stylefile? Every hint appreciated Toby