Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Version mkgmap-r4715 was committed by gerd on Fri, 14 May 2021 rework of options for reverse merge - replace option --x-force-reverse-merge by --allow-reverse-merge which has to be set to enable reversing for merge, add documentation - implement new option --line-types-with-direction to list line types which should not be reversed, also documented - special tag mkgmap:has-direction=yes/1/true can be used to to mark a line as not reversable - special tag mkgmap:has-direction=no/0/false can be used to to mark a line as reversable (does not overwrite oneway=yes or oneway=-1 tag, only the --line-types-with-direction option) - remove code to detect if style sets mkgmap:has-direction=true - remove code to propagte the mkgmap:has-direction=true tag to underlying roads, might not be needed this reverts r4713 and r4714 and partly r4703 - don't merge lines with different has-direction flag (as r4710 in the low-res-opt branch) http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/websvn/revision.php?repname=mkgmap&rev=4715
Hi all, I have also updated the low-res-opt branch with r4716. Let me here what you think about the new options and the results. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von svn commit <svn@mkgmap.org.uk> Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Mai 2021 17:16 An: mkgmap-svn@lists.mkgmap.org.uk; mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Betreff: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge Version mkgmap-r4715 was committed by gerd on Fri, 14 May 2021 rework of options for reverse merge - replace option --x-force-reverse-merge by --allow-reverse-merge which has to be set to enable reversing for merge, add documentation - implement new option --line-types-with-direction to list line types which should not be reversed, also documented - special tag mkgmap:has-direction=yes/1/true can be used to to mark a line as not reversable - special tag mkgmap:has-direction=no/0/false can be used to to mark a line as reversable (does not overwrite oneway=yes or oneway=-1 tag, only the --line-types-with-direction option) - remove code to detect if style sets mkgmap:has-direction=true - remove code to propagte the mkgmap:has-direction=true tag to underlying roads, might not be needed this reverts r4713 and r4714 and partly r4703 - don't merge lines with different has-direction flag (as r4710 in the low-res-opt branch) http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/websvn/revision.php?repname=mkgmap&rev=4715 _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
mkgmap:has-direction=no Does this overwrite the line types listed for not reversing when it comes to - don't merge lines with different has-direction flag (as r4710 in the low-res-opt branch)? E.g. in my style I first work off all the line types that are listed in --line-types-with-direction=XX Then I put a line highway=*, railway=*, ... {set mkgmap:has-direction=no } Or will this only affect lines where previously i have added mkgmap:has-direction=yes? In that way it would be indifferent from writing {delete mkgmap:has-direction } or am I missing something? On Fri, 14 May 2021 at 23:37, Gerd Petermann < gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I have also updated the low-res-opt branch with r4716. Let me here what you think about the new options and the results.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von svn commit <svn@mkgmap.org.uk> Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Mai 2021 17:16 An: mkgmap-svn@lists.mkgmap.org.uk; mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Betreff: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Version mkgmap-r4715 was committed by gerd on Fri, 14 May 2021
rework of options for reverse merge - replace option --x-force-reverse-merge by --allow-reverse-merge which has to be set to enable reversing for merge, add documentation - implement new option --line-types-with-direction to list line types which should not be reversed, also documented - special tag mkgmap:has-direction=yes/1/true can be used to to mark a line as not reversable - special tag mkgmap:has-direction=no/0/false can be used to to mark a line as reversable (does not overwrite oneway=yes or oneway=-1 tag, only the --line-types-with-direction option) - remove code to detect if style sets mkgmap:has-direction=true - remove code to propagte the mkgmap:has-direction=true tag to underlying roads, might not be needed this reverts r4713 and r4714 and partly r4703 - don't merge lines with different has-direction flag (as r4710 in the low-res-opt branch)
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/websvn/revision.php?repname=mkgmap&rev=4715 _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org
Or could I also get the disabled 4710 behaviour by simply adding a catchall as first line. e.g. highway=* | railway=* | oneway=* | waterway=* . {set mkgmap:has-direction=no } and then only those lines defined before to not be reversed will not be reversed, but all lines that are connected because of continue with a line type listed in the --line-types-with-direction=XX will be reversed? On Sat, 15 May 2021 at 10:50, Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> wrote:
mkgmap:has-direction=no
Does this overwrite the line types listed for not reversing when it comes to - don't merge lines with different has-direction flag (as r4710 in the low-res-opt branch)?
E.g. in my style I first work off all the line types that are listed in --line-types-with-direction=XX Then I put a line highway=*, railway=*, ... {set mkgmap:has-direction=no }
Or will this only affect lines where previously i have added mkgmap:has-direction=yes? In that way it would be indifferent from writing {delete mkgmap:has-direction } or am I missing something?
On Fri, 14 May 2021 at 23:37, Gerd Petermann < gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
I have also updated the low-res-opt branch with r4716. Let me here what you think about the new options and the results.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von svn commit <svn@mkgmap.org.uk> Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Mai 2021 17:16 An: mkgmap-svn@lists.mkgmap.org.uk; mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Betreff: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Version mkgmap-r4715 was committed by gerd on Fri, 14 May 2021
rework of options for reverse merge - replace option --x-force-reverse-merge by --allow-reverse-merge which has to be set to enable reversing for merge, add documentation - implement new option --line-types-with-direction to list line types which should not be reversed, also documented - special tag mkgmap:has-direction=yes/1/true can be used to to mark a line as not reversable - special tag mkgmap:has-direction=no/0/false can be used to to mark a line as reversable (does not overwrite oneway=yes or oneway=-1 tag, only the --line-types-with-direction option) - remove code to detect if style sets mkgmap:has-direction=true - remove code to propagte the mkgmap:has-direction=true tag to underlying roads, might not be needed this reverts r4713 and r4714 and partly r4703 - don't merge lines with different has-direction flag (as r4710 in the low-res-opt branch)
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/websvn/revision.php?repname=mkgmap&rev=4715 _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org
Hi all, It's quite difficult to understand what the direction AND oneway attributes mean. I try to explain what happens: For each line (and road) produced in the style mkgmap first checks if oneway=* or mkgmap:has-direction=* or the list from --line-types-with-direction says that the line has a direction -> dir-flag = true Next it checks if mkgmap:has-direction=no says that this direction should be ignored -> dir-flag=false This is done for a data structure ConvertedWay that still contains all the OSM tags. Next RoadMerger merges roads. It will not reverse roads with oneway flag true or direction flag true and it will not merge roads which have different oneway or direction flags. If it does that would clearly be an error. Next the data structures for IMG are created. Each line and road is converted to a MapLine or MapRoad object. Both have a dir-flag, MapRoad also has a pointer to further data for NOD which also contains the oneway flag. The dir-flag is set if the ConvertedWay says it is a oneway or has direction (or both). I am not sure if this is good, maybe for MapLine only the direction flag should be evaluated. Next the creation of sub divs per level start. For each sub div LineMerger takes all lines which are rendered at this level and tries to merge. If the level is for the overview map it will also merge roads. Unlike RoadMerger, The LineMerger looks only at type, name, and dir-flag and position of end nodes. Unlike RoadMerger It doesn't care if the original OSM ways are really connected. In the low-res-opt branch LineMerger will also "reverse-merge " two lines if reverse is allowed by option --allow-reverse-merge and dir-flag is false for both. For the overview map the LineMerger is executed again when the data from the different ovm_*.img files are combined. At this stage lines with extened type don't (yet) have a direction flag because mkgmap doesn't write this information (yet). Normal types have a dir-flag and they are all treated the same, the NOD data with the oneway flag is ignored. Also important now: LineMerger "sees" only the rounded coordinates, so it can merge even more lines (line dual carriage ways). tl;dr: If you want that mkgmap reverse-merges lines make sure that they don't have a oneway tag and set mkgmap:has-direction=no. We can discuss if the oneway tag should have an influence on the direction flag in IMG. I have not tried what happens when this is changed, it's a very old behaviour. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 05:04 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge Or could I also get the disabled 4710 behaviour by simply adding a catchall as first line. e.g. highway=* | railway=* | oneway=* | waterway=* . {set mkgmap:has-direction=no } and then only those lines defined before to not be reversed will not be reversed, but all lines that are connected because of continue with a line type listed in the --line-types-with-direction=XX will be reversed? On Sat, 15 May 2021 at 10:50, Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>> wrote: mkgmap:has-direction=no Does this overwrite the line types listed for not reversing when it comes to - don't merge lines with different has-direction flag (as r4710 in the low-res-opt branch)? E.g. in my style I first work off all the line types that are listed in --line-types-with-direction=XX Then I put a line highway=*, railway=*, ... {set mkgmap:has-direction=no } Or will this only affect lines where previously i have added mkgmap:has-direction=yes? In that way it would be indifferent from writing {delete mkgmap:has-direction } or am I missing something? On Fri, 14 May 2021 at 23:37, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi all, I have also updated the low-res-opt branch with r4716. Let me here what you think about the new options and the results. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> im Auftrag von svn commit <svn@mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:svn@mkgmap.org.uk>> Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Mai 2021 17:16 An: mkgmap-svn@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-svn@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>; mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> Betreff: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge Version mkgmap-r4715 was committed by gerd on Fri, 14 May 2021 rework of options for reverse merge - replace option --x-force-reverse-merge by --allow-reverse-merge which has to be set to enable reversing for merge, add documentation - implement new option --line-types-with-direction to list line types which should not be reversed, also documented - special tag mkgmap:has-direction=yes/1/true can be used to to mark a line as not reversable - special tag mkgmap:has-direction=no/0/false can be used to to mark a line as reversable (does not overwrite oneway=yes or oneway=-1 tag, only the --line-types-with-direction option) - remove code to detect if style sets mkgmap:has-direction=true - remove code to propagte the mkgmap:has-direction=true tag to underlying roads, might not be needed this reverts r4713 and r4714 and partly r4703 - don't merge lines with different has-direction flag (as r4710 in the low-res-opt branch) http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/websvn/revision.php?repname=mkgmap&rev=4715 _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org
Hi Gerd, I understand, that mkgmap:has-direction=no takes priority over list and that oneway is independent of has-direction.
Next RoadMerger merges roads. It will not reverse roads with oneway flag true or direction flag true and it will not merge roads which have different oneway or direction flags. If it does that
Looks OK. I think that lines with and without direction flag could be merged, but this probably would be a rather rare case if not error in style.
Each line and road is converted to a MapLine or MapRoad object. Both have a dir-flag, MapRoad also has a pointer to further data for NOD which also contains the oneway flag. The dir-flag is set if the ConvertedWay says it is a oneway or has direction (or both).
I guess, that oneway flag in NOD is only set because of oneway description in data. I think has-direction value shouldn't influence routing. -- Best regards, Andrzej
okay thanks I understand it now with the more detailed description. Strangely making sure direction is set to no following the section that should not be reversed led to an increase and not a decrease in file size - but that change was minimal. On Sat, 15 May 2021 at 17:55, Andrzej Popowski <popej@poczta.onet.pl> wrote:
Hi Gerd,
I understand, that mkgmap:has-direction=no takes priority over list and that oneway is independent of has-direction.
Next RoadMerger merges roads. It will not reverse roads with oneway flag true or direction flag true and it will not merge roads which have different oneway or direction flags. If it does that
Looks OK. I think that lines with and without direction flag could be merged, but this probably would be a rather rare case if not error in style.
Each line and road is converted to a MapLine or MapRoad object. Both have a dir-flag, MapRoad also has a pointer to further data for NOD which also contains the oneway flag. The dir-flag is set if the ConvertedWay says it is a oneway or has direction (or both).
I guess, that oneway flag in NOD is only set because of oneway description in data. I think has-direction value shouldn't influence routing.
-- Best regards, Andrzej _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org
Hi Andrzej, reg. " I think that lines with and without direction flag could be merged, but this probably would be a rather rare case if not error in style." I agree. I can try to add a log message for this case. what do you mean with "I think has-direction value shouldn't influence routing."? If you talk about results of mkgmap: It can influence routing when roads have wrong flags and thus are not merged. Or do you mean Garmin software (esp. the routing algo) doesn't care if the direction flag in RGN is set or not when it comes to routing? I think anything else would be surprising, but I also see no reason to set the direction flag in RGN to false when the oneway flag in NOD is true (or vice versa) Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Andrzej Popowski <popej@poczta.onet.pl> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 11:55 An: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge Hi Gerd, I understand, that mkgmap:has-direction=no takes priority over list and that oneway is independent of has-direction.
Next RoadMerger merges roads. It will not reverse roads with oneway flag true or direction flag true and it will not merge roads which have different oneway or direction flags. If it does that
Looks OK. I think that lines with and without direction flag could be merged, but this probably would be a rather rare case if not error in style.
Each line and road is converted to a MapLine or MapRoad object. Both have a dir-flag, MapRoad also has a pointer to further data for NOD which also contains the oneway flag. The dir-flag is set if the ConvertedWay says it is a oneway or has direction (or both).
I guess, that oneway flag in NOD is only set because of oneway description in data. I think has-direction value shouldn't influence routing. -- Best regards, Andrzej _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hi all I think lines with and without direction shouldn't be merged. The only reason, as far as I see, for having direction on lines is that they have a different visual representation. Ticker
Hi all, mayby my last post was unprecise. I would not merge lines with different direction flag. I only agreed that it would be a hint for a mistake in the style and thus a warning could be useful. I think if we look at a single resolution there should never be two lines with the same type but different direction flag. I think such a mixture makes no sense. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 13:58 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge Hi all I think lines with and without direction shouldn't be merged. The only reason, as far as I see, for having direction on lines is that they have a different visual representation. Ticker _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
yes there can be - same type but different routing priorities. As I said I use this for steep pathes for mountainbiking. Type is the same (invisible in the map). Once it is downhill only. Then I delete the oneway key and insert it again at road-class 0, road-speed 0 without oneway. It used to work great - newer versions of Basecamp / devices it still works but there are some problems if the route starts on exactly that type of way. On Sat, 15 May 2021 at 20:36, Gerd Petermann < gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
mayby my last post was unprecise. I would not merge lines with different direction flag. I only agreed that it would be a hint for a mistake in the style and thus a warning could be useful.
I think if we look at a single resolution there should never be two lines with the same type but different direction flag. I think such a mixture makes no sense.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 13:58 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Hi all
I think lines with and without direction shouldn't be merged. The only reason, as far as I see, for having direction on lines is that they have a different visual representation.
Ticker
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org
I only thought about non-routable lines and LineMerger. For roads it is normal to have different flags because of the oneway tag. Maybe I make too many assumptions about the possible usage of types... Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <extremecarver@gmail.com> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 14:42 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge yes there can be - same type but different routing priorities. As I said I use this for steep pathes for mountainbiking. Type is the same (invisible in the map). Once it is downhill only. Then I delete the oneway key and insert it again at road-class 0, road-speed 0 without oneway. It used to work great - newer versions of Basecamp / devices it still works but there are some problems if the route starts on exactly that type of way. On Sat, 15 May 2021 at 20:36, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: Hi all, mayby my last post was unprecise. I would not merge lines with different direction flag. I only agreed that it would be a hint for a mistake in the style and thus a warning could be useful. I think if we look at a single resolution there should never be two lines with the same type but different direction flag. I think such a mixture makes no sense. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk<mailto:rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk>> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 13:58 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge Hi all I think lines with and without direction shouldn't be merged. The only reason, as far as I see, for having direction on lines is that they have a different visual representation. Ticker _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org
Assuming that the output device shows the direction on lines with direction and doesn't on lines without: Another example is, say, [intermittent] water using type [0x26] 0x1f. stream/river will have a direction and canal/ditch won't. There will be others, under the control of the Style/TYP, so I don't think mkgmap should check/warn of this situation. Ticker On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 12:59 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I only thought about non-routable lines and LineMerger. For roads it is normal to have different flags because of the oneway tag. Maybe I make too many assumptions about the possible usage of types...
Gerd
I think the important question is if the oneway tag should be evaluated for non-routable lines. Felix already said no, I agree with that. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 16:04 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge Assuming that the output device shows the direction on lines with direction and doesn't on lines without: Another example is, say, [intermittent] water using type [0x26] 0x1f. stream/river will have a direction and canal/ditch won't. There will be others, under the control of the Style/TYP, so I don't think mkgmap should check/warn of this situation. Ticker On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 12:59 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I only thought about non-routable lines and LineMerger. For roads it is normal to have different flags because of the oneway tag. Maybe I make too many assumptions about the possible usage of types...
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
I agree. The style can test "oneway" and set mkgmap:has-direction if appropriate for non-roads. Ticker On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 14:53 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I think the important question is if the oneway tag should be evaluated for non-routable lines. Felix already said no, I agree with that.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 16:04 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Assuming that the output device shows the direction on lines with direction and doesn't on lines without:
Another example is, say, [intermittent] water using type [0x26] 0x1f. stream/river will have a direction and canal/ditch won't.
There will be others, under the control of the Style/TYP, so I don't think mkgmap should check/warn of this situation.
Ticker
On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 12:59 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I only thought about non-routable lines and LineMerger. For roads it is normal to have different flags because of the oneway tag. Maybe I make too many assumptions about the possible usage of types...
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hi all, OK, I'll try to change the code so that oneway=* has no effect on the dir-flag for non-routable lines. It's a bit tricky because of the overlays rule file. At least the OFM style still uses this and I forgot what it is good for. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 17:38 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge I agree. The style can test "oneway" and set mkgmap:has-direction if appropriate for non-roads. Ticker On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 14:53 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I think the important question is if the oneway tag should be evaluated for non-routable lines. Felix already said no, I agree with that.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 16:04 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Assuming that the output device shows the direction on lines with direction and doesn't on lines without:
Another example is, say, [intermittent] water using type [0x26] 0x1f. stream/river will have a direction and canal/ditch won't.
There will be others, under the control of the Style/TYP, so I don't think mkgmap should check/warn of this situation.
Ticker
On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 12:59 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I only thought about non-routable lines and LineMerger. For roads it is normal to have different flags because of the oneway tag. Maybe I make too many assumptions about the possible usage of types...
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hi all, what about routable lines with oneway? Should this force the direction flag in IMG format? I found no oneway road in Garmin maps where the dir-flag was not set, but Tickers finding reg. the Etrex HCx: showing compass directions for those roads seem to say that there is no clear rule about the meaning of this flag. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 18:30 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge Hi all, OK, I'll try to change the code so that oneway=* has no effect on the dir-flag for non-routable lines. It's a bit tricky because of the overlays rule file. At least the OFM style still uses this and I forgot what it is good for. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 17:38 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge I agree. The style can test "oneway" and set mkgmap:has-direction if appropriate for non-roads. Ticker On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 14:53 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I think the important question is if the oneway tag should be evaluated for non-routable lines. Felix already said no, I agree with that.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 16:04 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Assuming that the output device shows the direction on lines with direction and doesn't on lines without:
Another example is, say, [intermittent] water using type [0x26] 0x1f. stream/river will have a direction and canal/ditch won't.
There will be others, under the control of the Style/TYP, so I don't think mkgmap should check/warn of this situation.
Ticker
On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 12:59 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I only thought about non-routable lines and LineMerger. For roads it is normal to have different flags because of the oneway tag. Maybe I make too many assumptions about the possible usage of types...
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hi Probably the Garmin meaning has changed over time and it is now a display characteristic on some devices. oneway should continue to set it. {set mkgmap:has-direction=no} should end up with it not set (but correct routing). My eTrex has always shown this (looking back at an old map). I'd just never hovered over a one-way road and noticed. Maybe I'd seen something like "M3 (N)" and just assumed the carriageway was named as such. It is a bit of a rubbish way of showing one-way compared with putting an arrow on the road. Ticker On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 17:24 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi all,
what about routable lines with oneway? Should this force the direction flag in IMG format? I found no oneway road in Garmin maps where the dir-flag was not set, but Tickers finding reg. the Etrex HCx: showing compass directions for those roads seem to say that there is no clear rule about the meaning of this flag.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 18:30 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Hi all,
OK, I'll try to change the code so that oneway=* has no effect on the dir-flag for non-routable lines. It's a bit tricky because of the overlays rule file. At least the OFM style still uses this and I forgot what it is good for.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 17:38 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
I agree. The style can test "oneway" and set mkgmap:has-direction if appropriate for non-roads.
Ticker
On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 14:53 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I think the important question is if the oneway tag should be evaluated for non-routable lines. Felix already said no, I agree with that.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 16:04 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Assuming that the output device shows the direction on lines with direction and doesn't on lines without:
Another example is, say, [intermittent] water using type [0x26] 0x1f. stream/river will have a direction and canal/ditch won't.
There will be others, under the control of the Style/TYP, so I don't think mkgmap should check/warn of this situation.
Ticker
On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 12:59 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I only thought about non-routable lines and LineMerger. For roads it is normal to have different flags because of the oneway tag. Maybe I make too many assumptions about the possible usage of types...
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hi Ticker, that means that styles which don't render direction have to be changed to get the smallest IMG files. Where would you add the mkgmap:has-direction=no in the default style? Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 20:08 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge Hi Probably the Garmin meaning has changed over time and it is now a display characteristic on some devices. oneway should continue to set it. {set mkgmap:has-direction=no} should end up with it not set (but correct routing). My eTrex has always shown this (looking back at an old map). I'd just never hovered over a one-way road and noticed. Maybe I'd seen something like "M3 (N)" and just assumed the carriageway was named as such. It is a bit of a rubbish way of showing one-way compared with putting an arrow on the road. Ticker On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 17:24 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi all,
what about routable lines with oneway? Should this force the direction flag in IMG format? I found no oneway road in Garmin maps where the dir-flag was not set, but Tickers finding reg. the Etrex HCx: showing compass directions for those roads seem to say that there is no clear rule about the meaning of this flag.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 18:30 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Hi all,
OK, I'll try to change the code so that oneway=* has no effect on the dir-flag for non-routable lines. It's a bit tricky because of the overlays rule file. At least the OFM style still uses this and I forgot what it is good for.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 17:38 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
I agree. The style can test "oneway" and set mkgmap:has-direction if appropriate for non-roads.
Ticker
On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 14:53 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I think the important question is if the oneway tag should be evaluated for non-routable lines. Felix already said no, I agree with that.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 16:04 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Assuming that the output device shows the direction on lines with direction and doesn't on lines without:
Another example is, say, [intermittent] water using type [0x26] 0x1f. stream/river will have a direction and canal/ditch won't.
There will be others, under the control of the Style/TYP, so I don't think mkgmap should check/warn of this situation.
Ticker
On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 12:59 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I only thought about non-routable lines and LineMerger. For roads it is normal to have different flags because of the oneway tag. Maybe I make too many assumptions about the possible usage of types...
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hi Gerd Probably after: <finalize> oneway=* {set mkgmap:has-direction=no} Ticker On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 18:18 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi Ticker,
that means that styles which don't render direction have to be changed to get the smallest IMG files. Where would you add the mkgmap:has-direction=no in the default style?
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 20:08 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Hi
Probably the Garmin meaning has changed over time and it is now a display characteristic on some devices.
oneway should continue to set it. {set mkgmap:has-direction=no} should end up with it not set (but correct routing).
My eTrex has always shown this (looking back at an old map). I'd just never hovered over a one-way road and noticed. Maybe I'd seen something like "M3 (N)" and just assumed the carriageway was named as such.
It is a bit of a rubbish way of showing one-way compared with putting an arrow on the road.
Ticker
On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 17:24 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi all,
what about routable lines with oneway? Should this force the direction flag in IMG format? I found no oneway road in Garmin maps where the dir-flag was not set, but Tickers finding reg. the Etrex HCx: showing compass directions for those roads seem to say that there is no clear rule about the meaning of this flag.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 18:30 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Hi all,
OK, I'll try to change the code so that oneway=* has no effect on the dir-flag for non-routable lines. It's a bit tricky because of the overlays rule file. At least the OFM style still uses this and I forgot what it is good for.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 17:38 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
I agree. The style can test "oneway" and set mkgmap:has-direction if appropriate for non-roads.
Ticker
On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 14:53 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I think the important question is if the oneway tag should be evaluated for non-routable lines. Felix already said no, I agree with that.
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 16:04 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Assuming that the output device shows the direction on lines with direction and doesn't on lines without:
Another example is, say, [intermittent] water using type [0x26] 0x1f. stream/river will have a direction and canal/ditch won't.
There will be others, under the control of the Style/TYP, so I don't think mkgmap should check/warn of this situation.
Ticker
On Sat, 2021-05-15 at 12:59 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I only thought about non-routable lines and LineMerger. For roads it is normal to have different flags because of the oneway tag. Maybe I make too many assumptions about the possible usage of types...
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hi all I've been testing the effect of the DIR flag (0x40) in various ways: GPSMapEdit: shows a direction arrow on all standard line types. It appears not to read this flag for extended line types, but, if set manually, show an arrow on these as well. eTrex HCx: For all line types, including extended, when hovering over the line, appends " (DIR)" to the name, where DIR is N, NE, E etc. It does this regardless of any TYP representation of the line. eg "Newburgh Street (W)". eTrex 30x: Like above, but I don't think it shows (DIR) for extended types. Basecamp & Mapsource: Having the flag set makes no visible difference. There seems to be no way of interrogating road/line properties. I've not found any ill-effects of setting the DIR flag for extended types. I'm currently messing with TYP files and code to see if there is some combination where Garmin device/program will pick up a different [_line] definition if the dir flag is set. Ticker
Hi Ticker, if I got that right you say that the dir-for-extended.patch is the right way to set the direction flag in RGN for extended line types? Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 17:47 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge Hi all I've been testing the effect of the DIR flag (0x40) in various ways: GPSMapEdit: shows a direction arrow on all standard line types. It appears not to read this flag for extended line types, but, if set manually, show an arrow on these as well. eTrex HCx: For all line types, including extended, when hovering over the line, appends " (DIR)" to the name, where DIR is N, NE, E etc. It does this regardless of any TYP representation of the line. eg "Newburgh Street (W)". eTrex 30x: Like above, but I don't think it shows (DIR) for extended types. Basecamp & Mapsource: Having the flag set makes no visible difference. There seems to be no way of interrogating road/line properties. I've not found any ill-effects of setting the DIR flag for extended types. I'm currently messing with TYP files and code to see if there is some combination where Garmin device/program will pick up a different [_line] definition if the dir flag is set. Ticker _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hi Gerd I haven't found a problem with having having it set like this for extended types and I'll run with it like this for the moment. I might have got my eTrex HCx test confused, so not absolutely sure that it displayed a difference. I'll re-test. The other thing I'll test today is routing with NOD/NET ONEWAY correct and has_direction false. Ticker On Sun, 2021-05-16 at 04:28 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi Ticker,
if I got that right you say that the dir-for-extended.patch is the right way to set the direction flag in RGN for extended line types?
Gerd
________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap@jagit.co.uk> Gesendet: Samstag, 15. Mai 2021 17:47 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Commit r4715: rework of options for reverse merge
Hi all
I've been testing the effect of the DIR flag (0x40) in various ways:
GPSMapEdit: shows a direction arrow on all standard line types. It appears not to read this flag for extended line types, but, if set manually, show an arrow on these as well.
eTrex HCx: For all line types, including extended, when hovering over the line, appends " (DIR)" to the name, where DIR is N, NE, E etc. It does this regardless of any TYP representation of the line. eg "Newburgh Street (W)".
eTrex 30x: Like above, but I don't think it shows (DIR) for extended types.
Basecamp & Mapsource: Having the flag set makes no visible difference. There seems to be no way of interrogating road/line properties.
I've not found any ill-effects of setting the DIR flag for extended types.
I'm currently messing with TYP files and code to see if there is some combination where Garmin device/program will pick up a different [_line] definition if the dir flag is set.
Ticker
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
participants (5)
-
Andrzej Popowski -
Felix Hartmann -
Gerd Petermann -
svn commit -
Ticker Berkin