Johann Gail wrote:
Should we perhaps introduce a mkgmap:access: family of tags and map
the "native" tags to those?  e.g.,

access=no { add mkgmap:access:foot=no; add mkgmap:access:bicycle=no; ... }
access=yes { add mkgmap:access:foot=yes; add mkgmap:access:bicycle=yes; ... }
access=destination { similar... }
bicycle=no { set mkgmap:access:bicycle=no }
bicycle=yes { set mkgmap:access:bicycle=yes }
bicycle=destination { set mkgmap:access:bicycle=yes }

  
    
Yes, I like this idea. This would mean that everyone who need it could 
define its own mapping of the access tags in the style file. And it 
would be IMO a cleanly defined interface without uncertainities in the 
meanings of the tags. Furthermore it is extensible, if in future new 
tags are introduced in the osm data, e.g access=private or 
rollerblades=yes or whatever.

But I would expect some perfomance drop if each tag needs to be 
translated into the internal one.
  
I rather see the problem if you use such rules in the style-file now that you don't know whether they will be used or not (maybe another rule is already matching on the same street), or do you want to use these rules to precede all others?

access=no is generally a problematic case, very often it is in places where motorcar=no is correct, but people choose the wrong value.

Regards,
Johann
_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev