Okay I've worked through my way of all the new features/implementations needed for the mergeroads branch, but I get really stuck at the access treatment. It's basically impossible for me to implement it. I (and I know many other people using mkgmap do it too) often have conditions in the lines file, like the following: highway=path & tracktype=5 {set access=no} with the new notation that line becomes simply crazy: /(highway=path & tracktype=5) {set mkgmap:access:emergency=no; set mkgmap:access:delivery=no; set mkgmap:access:car=no; set mkgmap:access:bus=no; set mkgmap:access:taxi=no; set mkgmap:access:foot=no; set mkgmap:access:bike=no; set mkgmap:access:truck=no; set mkgmap:access:carpool=no }/ So clearly a function "set mkgmap:access=no" is needed for the lines file that is afterwards reworded to the long line above.... that would fit well with "set mkgmap:MODE=no" as proposed in the previous email. I won't be able to test the branch before the set mkgmap:access=no is implemented, because I simply cannot rewrite my style otherwise (it would mean that the character count of my lines file would double to triple, rendering the lines file very difficult to read). I think it's perfectly alright to move the current defaults of treating routable features into the style-file. It actually makes mkgmap behaviour much clearer, but there must be simple syntax which currently is missing. Felix P.S. I have currently 347 times "set access=no" in my lines file, only 10 or so before the first [0x??] so replacing that each time with/"set mkgmap:access:emergency=no; set mkgmap:access:delivery=no; set mkgmap:access:car=no; set mkgmap:access:bus=no; set mkgmap:access:taxi=no; set mkgmap:access:foot=no; set mkgmap:access:bike=no; set mkgmap:access:truck=no; set mkgmap:access:carpool=no"/ is crazy. (it's too bad that garmin couples the layout to the routing. If we had complete separation from routing and layout - it would be much much easier and allow for much simpler lines files - sadly this is not changeable at all. In that case we could have a routing file, and a lines_layout file both completely independent ) On 11.09.2013 21:15, WanMil wrote:
The goal of the branch is to give complete control to the style implementor. So we need the new tags mkgmap:access:bike, mkgmap:access:foot etc.
As a style developer you can decide to use the new tags directly or you can still use the OSM access tags and include the access handling at a later point in your style. Maybe it's easier for you if you know that only the value no is evaluated for the mkgmap:access:* tags. So setting them to yes or designated or whatever is the same like not setting the tag.
I am happy if you have any good ideas to make it simpler.
that only no matters I know of course. I didn't know however that the text block can also be added at the very end of the lines file (I assumed it needs to be set before an 0x?? routable line is handled in the style). That's perfect - in that case my style-file will stay easier to read and I'll just add the block as last line in my lines/point files.
That's a misunderstanding. The rules need to be assigned before setting the garmin type. I meant that you might be able to move the include directive to the point just before you start with assigning the garmin types. That's what I have done in the default style.