Hi again, sorry, forgot to propose this: railway=* & !(tunnel=yes) & !(building=yes) [0x14 resolution 22] as a 2nd alternative. Gerd From: gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 08:59:12 +0100 Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Railway tracks drawn around station buildings Hi Adrian, your post is hard to read, but I think the last solution is the only one that really solves the problem. So I'd vote for railway=* & !(tunnel=yes) & building!=* [0x14 resolution 22] instead of railway=* & !(tunnel=yes) [0x14 resolution 22] Gerd From: ar2988-os@outlook.com To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 00:51:57 +0000 Subject: [mkgmap-dev] Railway tracks drawn around station buildings This way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/72614628 is tagged building=yes and railway=station. In the generated map (r3436 and default style), it appears as a railway track following the outline of the building. At resolution 24, the building is not rendered. The tag railway=station was originally on a node on the track representing the stopping-point of trains. The tag was moved to the station building by another user (Christian Quest, no less, president of the board of OSM France). I would not have tagged it in that way, but it is one of several possibilities allowed for in the wiki. There are about 500 stations in France tagged in the same way (half of which have been edited by cquest). The railway track comes from line 166 of the lines style file railway=* & !(tunnel=yes) [0x14 resolution 22] Many values of the railway tag are in use, so I am not sure what is the best way to prevent railway lines being drawn round buildings. Some possibilities: A whitelist (railway=rail | railway=tram | railway=disused | railway=subway | railway=narrow_gauge | railway=light_rail | railway=preserved) & !(tunnel=yes) [0x14 resolution 22] A blacklist railway=* & railway!=station & railway!=construction & railway!=razed & railway!=dismantled & !(tunnel=yes) [0x14 resolution 22] (The whitelist and blacklist are based on the frequency of tags according to taginfo https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/railway?filter=ways#values ) Test for buildings railway=* & !(tunnel=yes) & building!=* [0x14 resolution 22] I prefer the whitelist because it gives you better control: you know exactly which tags are going to be rendered. Any thoughts? Adrian _______________________________________________ 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 Thorsten, yes, got that in my mind when I proposed my 2nd alternative, but it should probably be something like railway=* & !(tunnel=yes) & (building=no ! building!=*) [0x14 resolution 22] Or maybe we should add a general rule building=no {delete building} somewhere at the start of lines? Gerd

Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 09:08:09 +0100 From: kukuk@suse.de To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Railway tracks drawn around station buildings

On Mon, Feb 09, Gerd Petermann wrote:

...

Hi Adrian,

your post is hard to read, but I think the last solution is the only one that really solves the problem. So I'd vote for railway=* & !(tunnel=yes) & building!=* [0x14 resolution 22]

I have already seen building=no ...

Thorsten

...

instead of railway=* & !(tunnel=yes) [0x14 resolution 22]

Gerd

From: ar2988-os@outlook.com To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 00:51:57 +0000 Subject: [mkgmap-dev] Railway tracks drawn around station buildings

This way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/72614628 is tagged building=yes and railway=station. In the generated map (r3436 and default style), it appears as a railway track following the outline of the building. At resolution 24, the building is not rendered. The tag railway=station was originally on a node on the track representing the stopping-point of trains. The tag was moved to the station building by another user (Christian Quest, no less, president of the board of OSM France). I would not have tagged it in that way, but it is one of several possibilities allowed for in the wiki. There are about 500 stations in France tagged in the same way (half of which have been edited by cquest).

The railway track comes from line 166 of the lines style file railway=* & !(tunnel=yes) [0x14 resolution 22] Many values of the railway tag are in use, so I am not sure what is the best way to prevent railway lines being drawn round buildings. Some possibilities: A whitelist (railway=rail | railway=tram | railway=disused | railway=subway | railway=narrow_gauge | railway=light_rail | railway=preserved) & !(tunnel=yes) [0x14 resolution 22] A blacklist railway=* & railway!=station & railway!=construction & railway!=razed & railway!=dismantled & !(tunnel=yes) [0x14 resolution 22] (The whitelist and blacklist are based on the frequency of tags according to taginfo https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/railway?filter=ways#values ) Test for buildings railway=* & !(tunnel=yes) & building!=* [0x14 resolution 22]

I prefer the whitelist because it gives you better control: you know exactly which tags are going to be rendered. Any thoughts?

Adrian

_______________________________________________ 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

-- Thorsten Kukuk, Senior Architect SLES & Common Code Base SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Jennifer Guild, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

Hi Thorsten, maybe add it to polygons as well, as we don't evaluate the rules in lines for polygons created by mp-relations. Gerd

Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 09:13:49 +0100 From: kukuk@suse.de To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Railway tracks drawn around station buildings

On Mon, Feb 09, Gerd Petermann wrote:

...

Hi Thorsten,

yes, got that in my mind when I proposed my 2nd alternative, but it should probably be something like railway=* & !(tunnel=yes) & (building=no ! building!=*) [0x14 resolution 22]

Or maybe we should add a general rule building=no {delete building}

somewhere at the start of lines?

Great idea. I will do that now with my style, makes it clearly better readable and avoids more such pitfalls.

Thorsten

-- Thorsten Kukuk, Senior Architect SLES & Common Code Base SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Jennifer Guild, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

Hi Bernd, you are probably right that the whilelist is the better solution. I did not understand that the combination of railway=station and building=yes makes perfect sense while the other tags in the proposed whilelist do not. So, I'd say now that we should replace the line 166 railway=* & !(tunnel=yes) [0x14 resolution 22] by (railway=rail | railway=tram | railway=disused | railway=subway | railway=narrow_gauge | railway=light_rail | railway=preserved) & !(tunnel=yes) [0x14 resolution 22] If I here no complains I'll commit this tomorrow. Gerd

From: weigelt.bernd@web.de To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 11:23:39 +0100 Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Railway tracks drawn around station buildings

Am Montag, 9. Februar 2015, 09:11:43 schrieb Gerd Petermann: Hi Gerd

...

yes, got that in my mind when I proposed my 2nd alternative, but it should probably be something like railway=* & !(tunnel=yes) & (building=no ! building!=*) [0x14 resolution 22]

Or maybe we should add a general rule building=no {delete building}

somewhere at the start of lines?

I have problems to understand, why you're using such catchalls like railway=*.... in lines, IMHO it is better to use exact rules

railway=station as polygons are buildings and should be treated like that

[points] default GARMIN symbol railway=station | railway=halt [0x2f08 resolution 23]

no entry for railway=station in lines or polygons

[lines] railway=rail [0x14 resolution 22]

[polygons] building!=no [0x13 resolution 24 continue with_actions]

this is shortened what we used in our styles,

Bernd

-- amarok2 now playing:

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

Andrzej Popowski <popej@poczta.onet.pl> writes:

i always have treated default style as an example, not a real part of mkgmap program. I have assumed that some simplifications in this style are allowed ;)

I think that's a major bug. The default style should the equivalent of the released carto stylesheet and be the best known way to make a reasonable broadly-usable translation of the database. In general, mkgmap has been unnnecesarily hard to use; best practice involves giving lots of options. I realize this doesn't 10% make sense, but running it with essentially no options and the default style should get the standard result (thought to be best for some group of normal users with normal devices).

Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> writes:

I have no idea how the carto stylesheet works. I don't even know how it looks like. I guess this is used by the http://www.openstreetmap.org renderer? Please explain more detailed what you mean and how we could use it.

I didn't mean that mkgmap could use it. One can look at the trunk of the carto project as structurally similar to mkgmap in that it provides a standard/default conversion. The carto project seems to view their default as being the default mapnik/carto render, and curates it to be maximally useful for normal users (which is of course a hard thing to do and unclear if it's ever right, but the point is that they try). So, what I meant is that IMHO mkgmap should view the default style the same way, as providing the best conversion known to the mkgmap developers, where "best" means the conversion that is most useful to a user with no special desires running on some typical class of devices. The device target probably would be something reasonably modern, like an oregon or etrex 30 or a nuvi from the last few years, although I haven't found that anything newer than a Etrex Vista HCx to be all that different.

reg. options: I agree that the defaults are not very useful, esp. if you want a routable map. I see no simple way to change that without creating trouble for existing users.

My notion is basically that if someone pops up and says "I want to convert for a modern garmin and get all the features that are supported", then what's recommended for them should be the default. If people who don't want routable maps (or don't want something else) have to add --no-route, I think that's ok, and it's better to make a few people do that than to make almost everyone jump through hoops, searching around for lengthy sets of command-line arguments. Is anyone on the list actually trying to build non-routable maps? I would be curious as to why.

One idea: We might provide a few commented sample configuration files, e.g. one for car-routing , one for bicycle-routing, and one without routing.

Ideally these would just be styles (unless there are games for computing bicyles routes in car mode). But sure, that sounds reaasonable. Still, invoking mkgmap with no special options and the default style should produce a map that works well for car routing when used in car mode on normal devices. I find that mkgmap is close to unique among programs I run into; it seems very normal for what the development team thinks is the best mode to be default. THanks for listening! Greg

Andrzej Popowski <popej@poczta.onet.pl> writes:

...

I think that's a major bug.

It is a bug, but a minor one. It doesn't make mkgmap crash, it doesn't break map functionality and problem is not very visible on map.

I meant in terms of being usable and approachable for new users. People giving up is not so different than crashing in the end.

...

The default style should the equivalent of the released carto stylesheet and be the best known way to make a reasonable broadly-usable translation of the database.

This is impossible. I mean, default style creates a basic map. You should expect that it is correct and usable, but in no aspect you can call it "the best". And "the best" rating depends on map purpose and user preferences, so better we stay at "correct" grade ;)

Of course it's impossible to achieve, but many steps toward the goal are easy. I was reacting to the notion that fixing the railway station rendering didn't belong in the default style.