I didn't use it yet - need to find enough time to adapt my style - but I find the access handling a bit clumsy on the last step:
bicycle=* { set mkgmap:access:bike='${bicycle}' } carpool=* { set mkgmap:access:carpool='${carpool}' } foot=* { set mkgmap:access:foot='${foot}' } hgv=* { set mkgmap:access:truck='${hgv}' } motorcar=* { set mkgmap:access:car='${motorcar}' } motorcycle=* { set mkgmap:access:car='${motorcycle}'s } psv=* { set mkgmap:access:bus='${psv}' } taxi=* { set mkgmap:access:taxi='${taxi}' } emergency=* { set mkgmap:access:emergency='${emergency}' } delivery=* { set mkgmap:access:delivery='${delivery}' } goods=* { set mkgmap:access:delivery='${goods}' }
Is this really needed or could we skip that step in the style files? I use set access=.... very often, so it would make the style-file a bit more difficult to read by instead always using set mkgmap:access:.....=....
I'm fine with this however too, just find it a bit clumsy why this additional step is really needed. Is it to keep the handling of special actions with the same syntax everywhere? If so good.
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.
Besides everything looks fine to me.