Hi Felix, I've started a new thread for this as your post was a bit off topic here: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Patch-v5-correct-make-cycleways-tp5800981p580... I had the same idea when I tried to find a solution for the --make-opposite-cycleways option in the style, but then I thought that --make-opposite-cycleways should not be an option at all, these cycleways should be created in the default style if they don't cause any trouble. Your proposition sounds like #ifdef / #endif in a c /c++ prepro combined with defines passed to the compiler. I agree that this gives more flexibility, but it is also likely to reduce readability. The keyword includeoptional sounds more "include if you can find it". Are there other ideas out there? Gerd