Support for motor_vehicle=*
Having retagged some roads in my area as a result of some changes to road layouts, I noticed that my Garmin was routing me over a bit of road which I had tagged "motor_vehicle=no". The road is signposted with the usual "No Motor Vehicles" sign (red ring containing a car above a motorcycle) which, according to both the NL and general wikis should be tagged as "motor_vehicle=no". This is also supported by the fact that Potlatch2 includes an easily accessible facility to set this tag. Having browsed through the source and the style files I could find no reference to the motor_vehicle tag, which surprised me a bit... Anyway I fixed it for me by adding a single instruction to the "lines" file: # add support for motor_vehicle highway=* & motor_vehicle!=yes {add access='${motor_vehicle}'; add foot=yes; add bicycle=yes; add mofa=yes; add moped=yes; add horse=yes} This handles motor_vehicle=no and motor_vehicle=destination ("except for access" in the UK for example). I assume "motor_vehicle=yes" (don't know when one might use this) will work properly anyway. The moped and mofa tags reflect the rules here in NL, where these vehicles are not counted as motor vehicles for the purposes of this sign. If these subtleties are different in other countries, it can easily be adapted by referencing mkgmap:country. Is this a reasonable way to do this? If so, could it be added to the standard mkgmap distribution? Best regards, Colin Smale
On 10.10.2011 20:23, Colin Smale wrote:
Having retagged some roads in my area as a result of some changes to road layouts, I noticed that my Garmin was routing me over a bit of road which I had tagged "motor_vehicle=no". The road is signposted with the usual "No Motor Vehicles" sign (red ring containing a car above a motorcycle) which, according to both the NL and general wikis should be tagged as "motor_vehicle=no". This is also supported by the fact that Potlatch2 includes an easily accessible facility to set this tag.
Having browsed through the source and the style files I could find no reference to the motor_vehicle tag, which surprised me a bit... Anyway I fixed it for me by adding a single instruction to the "lines" file:
# add support for motor_vehicle highway=*& motor_vehicle!=yes {add access='${motor_vehicle}'; add foot=yes; add bicycle=yes; add mofa=yes; add moped=yes; add horse=yes}
This handles motor_vehicle=no and motor_vehicle=destination ("except for access" in the UK for example). I assume "motor_vehicle=yes" (don't know when one might use this) will work properly anyway. you can do whatever you want for moped or mofa. They don't exist for a Garmin GPS, so drop em. Not even motorcycle exist, so simply forget it quick again.
The moped and mofa tags reflect the rules here in NL, where these vehicles are not counted as motor vehicles for the purposes of this sign. If these subtleties are different in other countries, it can easily be adapted by referencing mkgmap:country.
Is this a reasonable way to do this? If so, could it be added to the standard mkgmap distribution? No a reasonable rule would be highway=* & motor_vehicle=no {set motorcar=no; set hgv=no; addt bus=no; add taxi=no; add truck=no; add emergency=no; add delivery=no}
or another way would be to do highway=* & motor_vehicle=* { add motorcar='${motor_vehicle}'; add bus=...... and so on but don't touch foot or bicycle especially adding yes is nonsense - yes is the default anyhow }
Best regards, Colin Smale
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
On 10/10/2011 21:36, Felix Hartmann wrote:
On 10.10.2011 20:23, Colin Smale wrote:
Having retagged some roads in my area as a result of some changes to road layouts, I noticed that my Garmin was routing me over a bit of road which I had tagged "motor_vehicle=no". The road is signposted with the usual "No Motor Vehicles" sign (red ring containing a car above a motorcycle) which, according to both the NL and general wikis should be tagged as "motor_vehicle=no". This is also supported by the fact that Potlatch2 includes an easily accessible facility to set this tag.
Having browsed through the source and the style files I could find no reference to the motor_vehicle tag, which surprised me a bit... Anyway I fixed it for me by adding a single instruction to the "lines" file:
# add support for motor_vehicle highway=*& motor_vehicle!=yes {add access='${motor_vehicle}'; add foot=yes; add bicycle=yes; add mofa=yes; add moped=yes; add horse=yes}
This handles motor_vehicle=no and motor_vehicle=destination ("except for access" in the UK for example). I assume "motor_vehicle=yes" (don't know when one might use this) will work properly anyway. you can do whatever you want for moped or mofa. They don't exist for a Garmin GPS, so drop em. Not even motorcycle exist, so simply forget it quick again.
Good point. However I am wondering if a moped or a "mofa" may sometimes be counted as a motor vehicle, and sometimes not. In NL they don't count but I can't find anything in UK law to indicate that they are not. So a moped may pass such a sign in NL but not in UK. By keeping the categories explicit I was trying to keep it easy to customise per country.
The moped and mofa tags reflect the rules here in NL, where these vehicles are not counted as motor vehicles for the purposes of this sign. If these subtleties are different in other countries, it can easily be adapted by referencing mkgmap:country.
Is this a reasonable way to do this? If so, could it be added to the standard mkgmap distribution? No a reasonable rule would be highway=*& motor_vehicle=no {set motorcar=no; set hgv=no; addt bus=no; add taxi=no; add truck=no; add emergency=no; add delivery=no}
or another way would be to do highway=*& motor_vehicle=* { add motorcar='${motor_vehicle}'; add bus=...... and so on but don't touch foot or bicycle especially adding yes is nonsense - yes is the default anyhow } My idea was to start from a base of access=no/destination and then explicitly allow non-motorised categories as this list seems to be much more compact. How is it better to start implicitly with access=yes and then explicitly deny access to certain categories instead? Does that work better in mkgmap?
Anyway I was hoping to see if there is any support for getting motor_vehicle into mkgmap, considering how well-established it seems to be on the wiki and in Potlatch. I don't really mind if it goes round the north or round the south, as long it has the desired effect. I have found a solution that works for me. There are 106000 ways out there with this tag. I thought someone else might also be wondering why their satnav sends them down illegal routes. --colin
Am 10.10.2011 20:23, schrieb Colin Smale:
Having browsed through the source and the style files I could find no reference to the motor_vehicle tag, which surprised me a bit... Anyway I fixed it for me by adding a single instruction to the "lines" file:
# add support for motor_vehicle highway=* & motor_vehicle!=yes {add access='${motor_vehicle}'; add foot=yes; add bicycle=yes; add mofa=yes; add moped=yes; add horse=yes}
In my style I use a similar but more simple rule: highway=* & vehicle=* {add motorcar='${vehicle}'} highway=* & motor_vehicle=* {add motorcar='${motor_vehicle}'} Yes, I know this is not 100% correct, because bicycles are also vehicles. Chris
participants (3)
-
Chris66 -
Colin Smale -
Felix Hartmann