<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>Hi Marko,<br><br>okay, thinking again about endlessly traveling in a loop I guess it is a special form<br>of a deadend when there is no other exit ;-)<br>At the moment I have no idea how we can separate the<br>two cases, but I agree that this should be handled.<br><br>Gerd<br><br><div><hr id="stopSpelling">From: gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<br>To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<br>Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 15:10:27 +0100<br>Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Diagnostic warnings for dead-end oneway highway=service<br><br>
<style><!--
.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P {
padding:0px;
}
.ExternalClass body.ecxhmmessage {
font-size:12pt;
font-family:Calibri;
}
--></style>
<div dir="ltr">Hi Marko,<br><br>reg. p-shaped: <br>The error was not in the foot, but in the other end. My understanding is that<br>that you can travel in that loop like in a roundabout, so it is not a dead end.<br><br>OK?<br><br>Gerd<br><br><div>> <br>> >3) The new check did not recognize P-shaped oneways as self-connecting.<br>> <br>> This was not a bug in the new check, but a bug in the old check!<br>> <br>> I agree that by definition, looped ways cannot be dead ends.<br>> <br>> For the purpose of detecting dead ends, we could ignore non-branching <br>> loops formed by a sequence of ways. Actually, it does not matter if the <br>> non-branching loops are oneway!<br>> <br>> If there is no non-looped way connected to both ends of the "foot" of <br>> the P, then the foot of the P forms a dead-end oneway. That is, a <br>> P-shaped oneway should be treated just like an I-shaped oneway that is <br>> obtained by removing the looped part.<br>> <br>> Maybe you could use this idea to improve dead-end checks? Note that a <br>> roundabout does not count as a non-branching loop, unless it is <br>> connected to a single oneway flare road only.<br>> <br>> >Attached is a new version of the patch.<br>> <br>> Thanks, I will try it later for today's data. I already ran trunk and <br>> the previous patch on the data.<br>> <br>> >I think this is okay as long as you see the warning for way Y.<br>> <br>> Me too, it is OK to be silent about some part of an error scenario, as <br>> long as some of the connected ways get flagged. I usually download a <br>> region around the problematic spot in order to figure out what the <br>> intention is and how it should be fixed.<br>> <br>> Marko<br>> _______________________________________________<br>> mkgmap-dev mailing list<br>> mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<br>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev<br></div> </div>
<br>_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev</div> </div></body>
</html>