overlapping highways and route restrictions
Hi all, please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible. The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008 (I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess) I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think? Gerd
For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard to find out what the outcome should be. The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one. The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess). On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible.
The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008
(I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess)
I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction
I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think?
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich
Hi Felix, yes, 1) would handle the case in my example. Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard to find out what the outcome should be. The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one. The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess). On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi all, please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible. The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008 (I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess) I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think? Gerd _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich
yes I know - but even though both ways you linked have different turn restriction ID - the content of the turn restriction is identical (only straight on). On 4 April 2018 at 10:54, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Felix,
yes, 1) would handle the case in my example. Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard to find out what the outcome should be. The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one.
The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess).
On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com <mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi all,
please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible.
The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008
(I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess)
I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction
I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think?
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich
Hi Felix, well, you started to mention route relations: "The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one." My understanding is that the code in mkgmap doesn't have to care about route relations (e.g. type=route, route=bicycle), this is done in the style. With your style those might cause more trouble because you add more routable lines for the members but the current overlap remover will only remove segments with more or less identical attributes. What you suggest requires a completely different approach, right? Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:58:43 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions yes I know - but even though both ways you linked have different turn restriction ID - the content of the turn restriction is identical (only straight on). On 4 April 2018 at 10:54, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Felix, yes, 1) would handle the case in my example. Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard to find out what the outcome should be. The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one. The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess). On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>> wrote: Hi all, please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible. The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008 (I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess) I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think? Gerd _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich
Yes I think that could be problematic. I'm not sure how it will end up. I do not create routable lines from the relations file directly, I use the set command and then in the lines file the additional ways are created - so that if one line has 1 or X route relations, there will be no difference. However that assumes they are all added to the same line I guess. So if different routes are copied onto different overlapping ways this principle would go wrong - it won't be a problem if the underlying overlaying ways are moved/merged before the handling of the relations however. I have so far seen mostly cases where two overlaying ways were both part of the same route relation - not of different route relations. On 4 April 2018 at 11:10, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Felix,
well, you started to mention route relations: "The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one." My understanding is that the code in mkgmap doesn't have to care about route relations (e.g. type=route, route=bicycle), this is done in the style. With your style those might cause more trouble because you add more routable lines for the members but the current overlap remover will only remove segments with more or less identical attributes. What you suggest requires a completely different approach, right?
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:58:43 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
yes I know - but even though both ways you linked have different turn restriction ID - the content of the turn restriction is identical (only straight on).
On 4 April 2018 at 10:54, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com <mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Felix,
yes, 1) would handle the case in my example. Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap- dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann < extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard to find out what the outcome should be. The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one.
The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess).
On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com <mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:G Petermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>> wrote: Hi all,
please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible.
The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008
(I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess)
I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction
I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think?
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists. mkgmap.org.uk>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich
Hi Felix, you may try r4147. I plan to add code to merge different labels of overlapping ways, I think I can't do much more. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 11:44:05 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions Yes I think that could be problematic. I'm not sure how it will end up. I do not create routable lines from the relations file directly, I use the set command and then in the lines file the additional ways are created - so that if one line has 1 or X route relations, there will be no difference. However that assumes they are all added to the same line I guess. So if different routes are copied onto different overlapping ways this principle would go wrong - it won't be a problem if the underlying overlaying ways are moved/merged before the handling of the relations however. I have so far seen mostly cases where two overlaying ways were both part of the same route relation - not of different route relations. On 4 April 2018 at 11:10, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Felix, well, you started to mention route relations: "The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one." My understanding is that the code in mkgmap doesn't have to care about route relations (e.g. type=route, route=bicycle), this is done in the style. With your style those might cause more trouble because you add more routable lines for the members but the current overlap remover will only remove segments with more or less identical attributes. What you suggest requires a completely different approach, right? Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:58:43 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions yes I know - but even though both ways you linked have different turn restriction ID - the content of the turn restriction is identical (only straight on). On 4 April 2018 at 10:54, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>> wrote: Hi Felix, yes, 1) would handle the case in my example. Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard to find out what the outcome should be. The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one. The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess). On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>>> wrote: Hi all, please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible. The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008 (I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess) I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think? Gerd _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich
okay that's fine. I think the result will lead to nearly no more actual problem cases... On 4 April 2018 at 12:44, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Felix,
you may try r4147. I plan to add code to merge different labels of overlapping ways, I think I can't do much more.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 11:44:05 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
Yes I think that could be problematic. I'm not sure how it will end up. I do not create routable lines from the relations file directly, I use the set command and then in the lines file the additional ways are created - so that if one line has 1 or X route relations, there will be no difference. However that assumes they are all added to the same line I guess. So if different routes are copied onto different overlapping ways this principle would go wrong - it won't be a problem if the underlying overlaying ways are moved/merged before the handling of the relations however.
I have so far seen mostly cases where two overlaying ways were both part of the same route relation - not of different route relations.
On 4 April 2018 at 11:10, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com <mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Felix,
well, you started to mention route relations: "The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one." My understanding is that the code in mkgmap doesn't have to care about route relations (e.g. type=route, route=bicycle), this is done in the style. With your style those might cause more trouble because you add more routable lines for the members but the current overlap remover will only remove segments with more or less identical attributes. What you suggest requires a completely different approach, right?
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap- dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann < extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:58:43 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
yes I know - but even though both ways you linked have different turn restriction ID - the content of the turn restriction is identical (only straight on).
On 4 April 2018 at 10:54, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com <mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:g petermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>> wrote: Hi Felix,
yes, 1) would handle the case in my example. Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap- dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@ lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto: extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto: extremecarver@gmail.com>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard to find out what the outcome should be. The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one.
The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess).
On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com <mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:G Petermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com
<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto: GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com <mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>>> wrote: Hi all,
please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible.
The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008
(I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess)
I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction
I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think?
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists. mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk< mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists. mkgmap.org.uk>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich
Hi Felix, Maybe we have different ideas what merging of labels means. With r4149 I've implemented this: If way w1 has e.g. mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" and mkgmap:label:2 = "N 232" (a ref) and way w2 has only mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" mkgmap adds mkgmap:label:2 from the first way. Also if w2 has e.g. mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Place" the merged result would be mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" mkgmap:label:2 = "N 232" mkgmap:label:3 = "Main Place" I did not yet test if that really works with address search, also there is no method to detect which way is w1 and which is w2. Probably order of appearance. Another option would be to somehow concatenate labels, esp. those from ref tags, but I have no idea how to code that as every style might use differents ways to combine refs. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 12:46:44 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions okay that's fine. I think the result will lead to nearly no more actual problem cases... On 4 April 2018 at 12:44, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Felix, you may try r4147. I plan to add code to merge different labels of overlapping ways, I think I can't do much more. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 11:44:05 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions Yes I think that could be problematic. I'm not sure how it will end up. I do not create routable lines from the relations file directly, I use the set command and then in the lines file the additional ways are created - so that if one line has 1 or X route relations, there will be no difference. However that assumes they are all added to the same line I guess. So if different routes are copied onto different overlapping ways this principle would go wrong - it won't be a problem if the underlying overlaying ways are moved/merged before the handling of the relations however. I have so far seen mostly cases where two overlaying ways were both part of the same route relation - not of different route relations. On 4 April 2018 at 11:10, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>> wrote: Hi Felix, well, you started to mention route relations: "The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one." My understanding is that the code in mkgmap doesn't have to care about route relations (e.g. type=route, route=bicycle), this is done in the style. With your style those might cause more trouble because you add more routable lines for the members but the current overlap remover will only remove segments with more or less identical attributes. What you suggest requires a completely different approach, right? Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:58:43 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions yes I know - but even though both ways you linked have different turn restriction ID - the content of the turn restriction is identical (only straight on). On 4 April 2018 at 10:54, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>>> wrote: Hi Felix, yes, 1) would handle the case in my example. Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard to find out what the outcome should be. The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one. The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess). On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>>>> wrote: Hi all, please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible. The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008 (I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess) I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think? Gerd _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich
It seems to be more easy to promote OSM Inspector and fix those faults... 😎 Henning On 4 Apr 2018, 21:55, at 21:55, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Felix,
Maybe we have different ideas what merging of labels means. With r4149 I've implemented this: If way w1 has e.g. mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" and mkgmap:label:2 = "N 232" (a ref) and way w2 has only mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" mkgmap adds mkgmap:label:2 from the first way. Also if w2 has e.g. mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Place" the merged result would be mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" mkgmap:label:2 = "N 232" mkgmap:label:3 = "Main Place" I did not yet test if that really works with address search, also there is no method to detect which way is w1 and which is w2. Probably order of appearance.
Another option would be to somehow concatenate labels, esp. those from ref tags, but I have no idea how to code that as every style might use differents ways to combine refs.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 12:46:44 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
okay that's fine. I think the result will lead to nearly no more actual problem cases...
On 4 April 2018 at 12:44, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Felix,
you may try r4147. I plan to add code to merge different labels of overlapping ways, I think I can't do much more.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 11:44:05 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
Yes I think that could be problematic. I'm not sure how it will end up. I do not create routable lines from the relations file directly, I use the set command and then in the lines file the additional ways are created - so that if one line has 1 or X route relations, there will be no difference. However that assumes they are all added to the same line I guess. So if different routes are copied onto different overlapping ways this principle would go wrong - it won't be a problem if the underlying overlaying ways are moved/merged before the handling of the relations however.
I have so far seen mostly cases where two overlaying ways were both part of the same route relation - not of different route relations.
On 4 April 2018 at 11:10, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>> wrote: Hi Felix,
well, you started to mention route relations: "The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one." My understanding is that the code in mkgmap doesn't have to care about route relations (e.g. type=route, route=bicycle), this is done in the style. With your style those might cause more trouble because you add more routable lines for the members but the current overlap remover will only remove segments with more or less identical attributes. What you suggest requires a completely different approach, right?
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:58:43 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
yes I know - but even though both ways you linked have different turn restriction ID - the content of the turn restriction is identical (only straight on).
On 4 April 2018 at 10:54, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>>> wrote: Hi Felix,
yes, 1) would handle the case in my example. Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard to find out what the outcome should be. The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one.
The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess).
On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>>>> wrote: Hi all,
please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible.
The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008
(I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess)
I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction
I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think?
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hi Henning, yes, it is quite astonishing that some of these errors exists since years, esp. in well mapped areas. I tried to find the source code for OSM Inspector but it seems this is closed source owned by Geofabrik? Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Henning Scholland <osm@hscholland.de> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 16:11:35 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions It seems to be more easy to promote OSM Inspector and fix those faults... 😎 Henning On 4 Apr 2018, at 21:55, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Felix, Maybe we have different ideas what merging of labels means. With r4149 I've implemented this: If way w1 has e.g. mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" and mkgmap:label:2 = "N 232" (a ref) and way w2 has only mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" mkgmap adds mkgmap:label:2 from the first way. Also if w2 has e.g. mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Place" the merged result would be mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" mkgmap:label:2 = "N 232" mkgmap:label:3 = "Main Place" I did not yet test if that really works with address search, also there is no method to detect which way is w1 and which is w2. Probably order of appearance. Another option would be to somehow concatenate labels, esp. those from ref tags, but I have no idea how to code that as every style might use differents ways to combine refs. Gerd ________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 12:46:44 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions okay that's fine. I think the result will lead to nearly no more actual problem cases... On 4 April 2018 at 12:44, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Felix, you may try r4147. I plan to add code to merge different labels of overlapping ways, I think I can't do much more. Gerd ________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 11:44:05 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions Yes I think that could be problematic. I'm not sure how it will end up. I do not create routable lines from the relations file directly, I use the set command and then in the lines file the additional ways are created - so that if one line has 1 or X route relations, there will be no difference. However that assumes they are all added to the same line I guess. So if different routes are copied onto different overlapping ways this principle would go wrong - it won't be a problem if the underlying overlaying ways are moved/merged before the handling of the relations however. I have so far seen mostly cases where two overlaying ways were both part of the same route relation - not of different route relations. On 4 April 2018 at 11:10, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>> wrote: Hi Felix, well, you started to mention route relations: "The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one." My understanding is that the code in mkgmap doesn't have to care about route relations (e.g. type=route, route=bicycle), this is done in the style. With your style those might cause more trouble because you add more routable lines for the members but the current overlap remover will only remove segments with more or less identical attributes. What you suggest requires a completely different approach, right? Gerd ________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:58:43 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions yes I know - but even though both ways you linked have different turn restriction ID - the content of the turn restriction is identical (only straight on). On 4 April 2018 at 10:54, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>>> wrote: Hi Felix, yes, 1) would handle the case in my example. Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations. Gerd ________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard to find out what the outcome should be. The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one. The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess). On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>>>> wrote: Hi all, please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible. The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008 (I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess) I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think? Gerd ________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org> & VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org> Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich ________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org> & VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org> Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich ________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org> & VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org> Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich ________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org> & VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org> Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich ________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
You can ask Frederik for it, but it's based on a database. There should be some old python code for it in the wiki work with osm data. Henning On 5 Apr 2018, 14:46, at 14:46, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Henning,
yes, it is quite astonishing that some of these errors exists since years, esp. in well mapped areas. I tried to find the source code for OSM Inspector but it seems this is closed source owned by Geofabrik?
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Henning Scholland <osm@hscholland.de> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 16:11:35 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
It seems to be more easy to promote OSM Inspector and fix those faults... 😎 Henning On 4 Apr 2018, at 21:55, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Felix,
Maybe we have different ideas what merging of labels means. With r4149 I've implemented this: If way w1 has e.g. mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" and mkgmap:label:2 = "N 232" (a ref) and way w2 has only mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" mkgmap adds mkgmap:label:2 from the first way. Also if w2 has e.g. mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Place" the merged result would be mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" mkgmap:label:2 = "N 232" mkgmap:label:3 = "Main Place" I did not yet test if that really works with address search, also there is no method to detect which way is w1 and which is w2. Probably order of appearance.
Another option would be to somehow concatenate labels, esp. those from ref tags, but I have no idea how to code that as every style might use differents ways to combine refs.
Gerd
________________________________
Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 12:46:44 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
okay that's fine. I think the result will lead to nearly no more actual problem cases...
On 4 April 2018 at 12:44, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Felix,
you may try r4147. I plan to add code to merge different labels of overlapping ways, I think I can't do much more.
Gerd
________________________________
Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 11:44:05 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
Yes I think that could be problematic. I'm not sure how it will end up. I do not create routable lines from the relations file directly, I use the set command and then in the lines file the additional ways are created - so that if one line has 1 or X route relations, there will be no difference. However that assumes they are all added to the same line I guess. So if different routes are copied onto different overlapping ways this principle would go wrong - it won't be a problem if the underlying overlaying ways are moved/merged before the handling of the relations however.
I have so far seen mostly cases where two overlaying ways were both part of the same route relation - not of different route relations.
On 4 April 2018 at 11:10, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>> wrote: Hi Felix,
well, you started to mention route relations: "The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one." My understanding is that the code in mkgmap doesn't have to care about route relations (e.g. type=route, route=bicycle), this is done in the style. With your style those might cause more trouble because you add more routable lines for the members but the current overlap remover will only remove segments with more or less identical attributes. What you suggest requires a completely different approach, right?
Gerd
________________________________
Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:58:43 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
yes I know - but even though both ways you linked have different turn restriction ID - the content of the turn restriction is identical (only straight on).
On 4 April 2018 at 10:54, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>>> wrote: Hi Felix,
yes, 1) would handle the case in my example. Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations.
Gerd
________________________________
Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard to find out what the outcome should be. The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one.
The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess).
On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>>>> wrote: Hi all,
please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible.
The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008
(I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess)
I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction
I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think?
Gerd
________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org> & VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org> Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich ________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org> & VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org> Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich ________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org> & VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org> Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich ________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org> & VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org> Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich ________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
I think I found it: https://github.com/geofabrik/osmi_simple_views Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Henning Scholland <osm@hscholland.de> Gesendet: Freitag, 6. April 2018 08:46:51 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions You can ask Frederik for it, but it's based on a database. There should be some old python code for it in the wiki work with osm data. Henning On 5 Apr 2018, at 14:46, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Henning, yes, it is quite astonishing that some of these errors exists since years, esp. in well mapped areas. I tried to find the source code for OSM Inspector but it seems this is closed source owned by Geofabrik? Gerd ________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Henning Scholland <osm@hscholland.de> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 16:11:35 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions It seems to be more easy to promote OSM Inspector and fix those faults... 😎 Henning On 4 Apr 2018, at 21:55, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Felix, Maybe we have different ideas what merging of labels means. With r4149 I've implemented this: If way w1 has e.g. mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" and mkgmap:label:2 = "N 232" (a ref) and way w2 has only mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" mkgmap adds mkgmap:label:2 from the first way. Also if w2 has e.g. mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Place" the merged result would be mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" mkgmap:label:2 = "N 232" mkgmap:label:3 = "Main Place" I did not yet test if that really works with address search, also there is no method to detect which way is w1 and which is w2. Probably order of appearance. Another option would be to somehow concatenate labels, esp. those from ref tags, but I have no idea how to code that as every style might use differents ways to combine refs. Gerd ________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 12:46:44 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions okay that's fine. I think the result will lead to nearly no more actual problem cases... On 4 April 2018 at 12:44, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Felix, you may try r4147. I plan to add code to merge different labels of overlapping ways, I think I can't do much more. Gerd ________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 11:44:05 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions Yes I think that could be problematic. I'm not sure how it will end up. I do not create routable lines from the relations file directly, I use the set command and then in the lines file the additional ways are created - so that if one line has 1 or X route relations, there will be no difference. However that assumes they are all added to the same line I guess. So if different routes are copied onto different overlapping ways this principle would go wrong - it won't be a problem if the underlying overlaying ways are moved/merged before the handling of the relations however. I have so far seen mostly cases where two overlaying ways were both part of the same route relation - not of different route relations. On 4 April 2018 at 11:10, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>> wrote: Hi Felix, well, you started to mention route relations: "The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one." My understanding is that the code in mkgmap doesn't have to care about route relations (e.g. type=route, route=bicycle), this is done in the style. With your style those might cause more trouble because you add more routable lines for the members but the current overlap remover will only remove segments with more or less identical attributes. What you suggest requires a completely different approach, right? Gerd ________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:58:43 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions yes I know - but even though both ways you linked have different turn restriction ID - the content of the turn restriction is identical (only straight on). On 4 April 2018 at 10:54, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>>> wrote: Hi Felix, yes, 1) would handle the case in my example. Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations. Gerd ________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard to find out what the outcome should be. The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one. The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess). On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>>>> wrote: Hi all, please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible. The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008 (I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess) I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think? Gerd ________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org><http://Openmtbmap.org> & VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org><http://VeloMap.org> Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich ________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org><http://Openmtbmap.org> & VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org><http://VeloMap.org> Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich ________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org><http://Openmtbmap.org> & VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org><http://VeloMap.org> Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich ________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org><http://Openmtbmap.org> & VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org><http://VeloMap.org> Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich ________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev ________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hi Gerd, I would ignore them and write a warning/info. Of course mkgmap could try to handle it, but I don't think it's worth. Better fix it in the data,which anyway needs to be done. Henning On 4 Apr 2018, 17:11, at 17:11, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Felix,
well, you started to mention route relations: "The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one." My understanding is that the code in mkgmap doesn't have to care about route relations (e.g. type=route, route=bicycle), this is done in the style. With your style those might cause more trouble because you add more routable lines for the members but the current overlap remover will only remove segments with more or less identical attributes. What you suggest requires a completely different approach, right?
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:58:43 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
yes I know - but even though both ways you linked have different turn restriction ID - the content of the turn restriction is identical (only straight on).
On 4 April 2018 at 10:54, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi Felix,
yes, 1) would handle the case in my example. Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard to find out what the outcome should be. The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one.
The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess).
On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>>> wrote: Hi all,
please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it finds overlapping road segments and one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible.
The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are members of (different) restriction relations: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008
(I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess)
I see different possibilities: 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction
I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data here. What do you think?
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
participants (4)
-
Felix Hartmann -
Gerd Petermann -
Gerd Petermann
-
Henning Scholland