Hi Mike, I think this problem is a bit like the one that was solved with the not-contained filter that was recently added. Maybe you can code a similar filter to solve your problem? Gerd Mike Baggaley wrote
Hi, I have the following lines in my relations file:
type=route & (route~'.*foot.*' | route~'.*hiking.*') & network~'.*[nr]wn.*' & name~".*\(.*\)" { set name='${name|subst:"\(.*\)~>"}'} type=route & (route~'.*foot.*' | route~'.*hiking.*') & network~'.*[nr]wn.*' & name=* { apply_once { set hikingroute=yes; set rn='$(rn) & ${name}' | '${name}'; } }
This is working, but if for example the way has two hiking relations with names "Shropshire Way (Route 1)" and "Shropshire Way (Route 2)", the first rule changes the names of both relations to "Shropshire Way", and the second rule sets the rn tag of the way to "Shropshire Way & Shropshire Way". I would like to check whether the rn tag on the way already contains the name of the relation (or is equal to if contains can't be done), so that I end up with rn as "Shropshire Way". Can anyone tell me how this can be achieved?
Thanks, Mike
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
-- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/comparison-of-relation-tag-and-way-tag-tp5837... Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.