<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 Mike,<br><br>I still don't understand the effect on wrong routing through oneways.<br><br>Anyway, I don't see that anyone else is interested in changing this option,<br>so maybe I'll just commit the patch that changes mkgmap to delete<br>the tags handled in inc/access.<br><br>Gerd<br><br><div>From: mike@tvage.co.uk<br>To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<br>Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2015 17:04:27 +0000<br>Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] FW: --make-opposite-cycleways option<br><br><pre>HI Gerd, thanks - I didn't spot the entry in the documentation because<br>mkgmap:road-speed-class is displayed over two lines in the PDF document, so<br>searching for it appears not to work.<br> <br>I have now determined that if I also delete maxspeed from the cycleway, so<br>that mkgmap:road-speed-class does not get set in inc/roadspeed, then the<br>routing works correctly.<br> <br>Updated patch attached.<br> <br>Regards,<br>Mike<br> <br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: GerdP [mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com] <br>Sent: 08 March 2015 11:08<br>To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<br>Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] FW: --make-opposite-cycleways option<br> <br>Hi Mike,<br> <br>the tag mkgmap:road-speed-class is documented in <br>d:\mkgmap\doc\styles\internal-tags.txt <br>I think it works as documented. Not sure why it breaks<br>routing when it is not used.<br> <br>Gerd<br> <br> <br>Mike Baggaley wrote<br>> HI Gerd, I have now investigated further and have discovered that the<br>> difference between my lines file that works and the default that doesn't<br>> is<br>> that I don't include inc/roadspeed. The setting of mkgmap:road-speed-class<br>> in this file seems to break the routing when an opposite cycleway is added<br>> from the style file. This setting is not mentioned in the style manual, so<br>> I<br>> don't know what it is supposed to do. Can you take a look at this?<br>> <br>> Thanks,<br>> Mike<br>> <br>> From: Gerd Petermann [mailto:<br> <br>> gpetermann_muenchen@<br> <br>> ] <br>> Sent: 07 March 2015 18:29<br>> To: <br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] FW: --make-opposite-cycleways option<br>> <br>> Hi Mike,<br>> <br>> yes, also sounds like a good idea to me,<br>> but doesn't solve the initial problem regarding <br>> routing in the cycleway.<br>> <br>> Gerd<br>> _____ <br>> <br>> From: <br> <br>> mike@.co<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mike@.co<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> To: <br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2015 13:07:47 +0000<br>> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] FW: --make-opposite-cycleways option<br>> Hi Gerd, I suggest it might be more useful to make it a more general<br>> purpose<br>> option for affecting the order of precedence used with the continue<br>> statement, something like mkgmap:precedence=<br>> <integer><br>> where negative number<br>> are added before positive ones and the default precedence is 0. This would<br>> allow you to specify a road, bridge and cycleway on the same highway<br>> segment<br>> and specify what order they should be created in. Alternatively, the<br>> precedence could be specified as part of the continue statement e.g [0x10<br>> road_class=0 road_speed=0 resolution 24 continue precedence=1] would mean<br>> create after all the matches have been completed<br>> <br>> Regards,<br>> Mike<br>> From: Gerd Petermann [mailto:<br> <br>> gpetermann_muenchen@<br> <br>> ] <br>> Sent: 07 March 2015 09:12<br>> To: <br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> Subject: [mkgmap-dev] FW: --make-opposite-cycleways option<br>> <br>> Hi all,<br>> <br>> sorry, I hit the send button by mistake.<br>> ...<br>> Did anybody think about this proposal?<br>> 2) Maybe we can replace the --make-opposite-cycleways option by <br>> a new special tag like mkgmap:add_cycleway=[before|after] ?<br>> <br>> The idea is to change the code in mkgmap so that it doesn't create a copy<br>> of the way BEFORE style processing, instead it checks if this tag occurs<br>> and<br>> adds a copy with bicycle-only and "oneway=no" after style processing.<br>> The tag value before / after tells mkgmap if the cycleway should be added<br>> before<br>> or after the "normal" way.<br>> I see only one theoretical problem: if the style adds the same OSM way two<br>> or more times<br>> with this tag, should we also add multiple cycleways? And where exactly?<br>> I think we would have to ignore all sub sequent ways.<br>> <br>> Gerd<br>> _____ <br>> <br>> <br>> Hi Mike,<br>> <br>> I think a possible problem with your patch is that you always add the<br>> cycle<br>> way<br>> with type 0x10, without further checking the attributes of the highway.<br>> <br>> The -make-opposite-cycleways option would add the cycle way with the same<br>> type<br>> as that for the car.<br>> <br>> <br>> Gerd<br>> _____ <br>> <br>> From: <br> <br>> mike@.co<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mike@.co<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> To: <br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 00:11:00 +0000<br>> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] --make-opposite-cycleways option<br>> Hi Gerd, I added the following to the lines file in my style and it works<br>> fine there if I remove the --make-opposite-cycleways option, allowing just<br>> cycling and walking against the flow. However, it doesn't seem to work<br>> correctly if I add it to the default style (it allows cars to go the wrong<br>> way along the one-way street).<br>> <br>> highway=* & (oneway=yes | oneway=-1 | oneway=true | oneway=1 |<br>> oneway=reverse) & (oneway:bicycle=no | cycleway=opposite |<br>> cycleway=opposite_lane | cycleway=opposite_track) {delete oneway; delete<br>> cycleway; set access=no; delete foot; delete vehicle; delete<br>> motor_vehicle;<br>> delete motorcar; delete goods; delete hgv; delete psv; delete emergency;<br>> delete taxi; delete bus; add bicycle=yes; set highway=cycleway} [0x10<br>> road_class=0 road_speed=1 resolution 24 continue]<br>> <br>> I can't see why this might be happening. Has anyone any ideas (the<br>> attached<br>> patch is what I changed)?<br>> <br>> Regards,<br>> Mike<br>> <br>> From: Gerd Petermann [mailto:<br> <br>> gpetermann_muenchen@<br> <br>> ] <br>> Sent: 04 March 2015 16:22<br>> To: <br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] --make-opposite-cycleways option<br>> <br>> Hi Mike,<br>> <br>> the style cannot create a way, but it can add multiple routable ways for<br>> one<br>> OSM way.<br>> Use "continue" or "continue with actions" for that.<br>> <br>> The comment is a bit misleading and I think the code for "old-style" is<br>> now<br>> obsolete as well.<br>> <br>> Gerd<br>> _____ <br>> <br>> From: <br> <br>> mike@.co<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mike@.co<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> To: <br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 16:01:56 +0000<br>> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] --make-opposite-cycleways option<br>> Hi Gerd, I was not clear what you meant by change the style to produce the<br>> same result, so I provided a change to the style that with the code<br>> changes<br>> produces the same result as now. Unless a style can create an extra way, I<br>> can't see how a style can be set up to allow cycling in both directions,<br>> but<br>> other traffic only in one direction without using the extra way created by<br>> the --make-opposite-cycleways code. Can a style create a way? I got the<br>> list<br>> of tags to delete from the following code which suggested that the<br>> following<br>> lines were all access tags (plus a few tags mentioned elsewhere that I<br>> also<br>> included):<br>> <br>> public boolean init(ElementSaver saver, EnhancedProperties<br>> props) {<br>> <br>> if (props.getProperty("old-style", false))<br>> {<br>> // the access tags need to<br>> be loaded if the old style handling<br>> // is active and access<br>> restrictions are handled by the java<br>> // source code and not by<br>> the style<br>> usedTags.add("access");<br>> usedTags.add("bicycle");<br>> usedTags.add("carpool");<br>> usedTags.add("delivery");<br>> usedTags.add("emergency");<br>> usedTags.add("foot");<br>> usedTags.add("goods");<br>> usedTags.add("hgv");<br>> usedTags.add("motorcar");<br>> <br>> usedTags.add("motorcycle");<br>> usedTags.add("psv");<br>> usedTags.add("route");<br>> usedTags.add("taxi");<br>> }<br>> <br>> I gather that route is not an access tag, so I agree that it should not be<br>> included.<br>> <br>> Regards,<br>> Mike<br>> <br>> From: Gerd Petermann [mailto:<br> <br>> gpetermann_muenchen@<br> <br>> ] <br>> Sent: 04 March 2015 05:31<br>> To: <br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] --make-opposite-cycleways option<br>> <br>> Hi Mike,<br>> <br>> as I said, I'd be more happy to have a patch that remove's the option<br>> and shows how to change the default style instead to get the same result <br>> as with your patch.<br>> <br>> Your patch tries to remove all kinds of tags which might lead to wrong<br>> routing:<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("vehicle");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("motor_vehicle");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("carpool");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("delivery");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("emergency");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("foot");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("goods");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("hgv");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("motorcar");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("motorcycle");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("psv");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("route");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("taxi");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("bus");<br>> + cycleWay.deleteTag("truck"); <br>> <br>> Please explain why you remove route=* .<br>> I think that one should be kept.<br>> <br>> Gerd<br>> _____ <br>> <br>> From: <br> <br>> mike@.co<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mike@.co<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> To: <br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 19:45:00 +0000<br>> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] --make-opposite-cycleways option<br>> HI Gerd, the attached updated patch adds a line to the default style that<br>> can be uncommented if you want to see the opposite cycleway names as they<br>> are currently.<br>> <br>> Regards,<br>> Mike<br>> <br>> From: Gerd Petermann [mailto:<br> <br>> gpetermann_muenchen@<br> <br>> ] <br>> Sent: 03 March 2015 08:26<br>> To: <br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] --make-opposite-cycleways option<br>> <br>> Hi Mike,<br>> <br>> I think you are right regarding the access tags.<br>> The current solution in combination with the default style<br>> might route a truck through the wrong direction of a oneway.<br>> Thanks for pointing this out.<br>> <br>> If I got it right, most style developers don't use this option,<br>> they prefer to have the logic in the rules.<br>> Maybe this is another argument to remove the option<br>> instead of adding code to make it work in special cases?<br>> <br>> Is anybody able to change the default style so that it produces<br>> the same result ?<br>> <br>> Gerd<br>> From: <br> <br>> mike@.co<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mike@.co<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> To: <br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt; <br>> Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 22:46:07 +0000<br>> Subject: [mkgmap-dev] --make-opposite-cycleways option<br>> Dear all,<br>> <br>> When using the --make-opposite-cycleways option, I notice that the address<br>> index adds a road name of the actual road name suffixed with "<br>> (cycleway)".<br>> For me at least, this is undesirable. Also the generated name does not<br>> conform to the OSM naming convention of not including any descriptive<br>> information in names. I therefore propose that the name of an opposite<br>> cycleway be set to the same as the original road name, and that users who<br>> want to name the opposite cycleway differently should use the style file<br>> to<br>> rename it.<br>> <br>> In looking at the code that produces the opposite cycleway, I also believe<br>> there is an error in the way it handles access tags - the code currently<br>> sets access=no, bicycle=yes and foot=no, but ignores all other access<br>> tags.<br>> Hence if (for example) the road has psv=yes on it, the generated cycleway<br>> will also have psv=yes (unless I am misunderstanding something in the<br>> handling of access tags). <br>> <br>> I therefore submit the attached patch for trial.<br>> <br>> Regards,<br>> Mike<br>> <br>> _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt;<br>> <a href="http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev" target="_blank">http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev</a><br>> <br>> _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt;<br>> <a href="http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev" target="_blank">http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev</a><br>> <br>> _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt;<br>> <a href="http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev" target="_blank">http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev</a><br>> <br>> _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt;<br>> <a href="http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev" target="_blank">http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev</a><br>> <br>> _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt;<br>> <a href="http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev" target="_blank">http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev</a><br>> <br>> _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &lt;mailto:<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> &gt;<br>> <a href="http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev" target="_blank">http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev</a><br>> <br>> _______________________________________________<br>> mkgmap-dev mailing list<br> <br>> mkgmap-dev@.org<br> <br>> <a href="http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev" target="_blank">http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev</a><br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>--<br>View this message in context:<br><a href="http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/make-opposite-cycleways-option-tp5835586p5836" target="_blank">http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/make-opposite-cycleways-option-tp5835586p5836</a><br>256.html<br>Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.<br> <br></pre><br>_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev</div> </div></body>
</html>