Moin,
I am not sure, I understand plans completely.
Felix Hartmann schrieb:
I have a: highway=path; route=mtb; mtb:scale=0: mtb:scale:uphill=0
mtb:scale=0 & mtb:scale:uphill=0 & route=mtb { name 'mtbrt00 ${name}' |
'mtbrt00' } continue
mtb:scale:uphill=0 & route=mtb { name 'mtbrt.0 ${name}' | 'mtbrt.0' }
continue
mtb:scale=0 & route=mtb { name 'mtbrt0. ${name}' | 'mtbrt0.' } continue
highway=path { name '${name} pth' | 'pth' }
continue
would make all three rules being enacted which I do not want, I only
want to have further rules still run again on the same objects (if not
yet written out to 0x* without continue).
So in this case, you only want to have the first of your action rules
beeing carried out, the next two action rules shall be left out, and
than the conversion shall contiue with last rule and carrie on with all
following rules?
No, not the first. I want that it stops after the first matching. So if
the first matches, 2 and 3 are dropped. if 2 matches 3 is dropped.
I do not see any usefull syntax right now, to enable such complex
style-rules control. But I think you can reach your goal quite easily,
when you introduce some auxilliary flags:
mkgmap_mtbrt_name_fixed!=yes & mtb:scale=0 & mtb:scale:uphill=0 &
route=mtb { name 'mtbrt00 ${name}' | 'mtbrt00' ;
mkgmap_mtbrt_name_fixed=yes } continue
mkgmap_mtbrt_name_fixed!=yes & mtb:scale:uphill=0 & route=mtb { name
'mtbrt.0 ${name}' | 'mtbrt.0' ; mkgmap_mtbrt_name_fixed=yes } continue
mkgmap_mtbrt_name_fixed!=yes & mtb:scale=0 & route=mtb { name 'mtbrt0.
${name}' | 'mtbrt0.' ; mkgmap_mtbrt_name_fixed=yes } continue
okay, I see that point. makes it a bit more complicated.
*Actually* it would be great if we could define a type, say 0x999999
which drops items out from further processing because we don't want them
to be displayed at all in our map. I.e. I don't want my maps to include
waterway=* & tunnel=yes, but I want to display all tunnel=yes with type
0x*. To speed up the processing any object which is on type 0x99999 is
dropped from further processing and not put into the map. This would
avoid a lot of != use and could speed up mkgmap because you can quickly
exclude objects from the database that the rules and following lines
have to be run against.
I think the 0x999999 is quite a bad hack. But some kind of stop command
might be really usefull, not only for performance gains but also for
making the style files less complicated.
I did not mean to actually put 0x999999 into the final map. I just used
it because 0x999999 can never exist. Of course stop as command would
work too.
But what about a style rule without the continue? Wouldn't this stop the
processing. I haven't look at the latest work from Steve yet, but in
your above eyample, you use the continue statement on rules with an
action part only. If you insert a rule like:
waterway=* & tunnel=yes {set ignored=yes}
without any continue, shouldn't this stop the processing of the item?
Currently the continue as Steve implemented it does not work at all for
action rules - they don't seem to have an effect. But yes to answer the
question, a stop command should stop the processing of the item. So
stop and continue together are impossible. Without stop command or
ignored=yes in a simple action rule, they will be taken into account in
0x* rules - that is what I don't want.