[mkgmap-dev] Continue behaviour changed?
From Steve Ratcliffe steve at parabola.me.uk on Thu Feb 11 00:50:36 GMT 2010
On 10/02/10 21:11, Mark Burton wrote: > I just noticed that the recent changes to the style engine have broken > my map. I think it's possibly down to me using 'continue' in these > rules (that appear before the rules that generate the roads): > > highway=*& bridge=yes { delete 'ref'; delete 'int_ref'; delete 'name'; } [0x010107 continue resolution 24] > railway=*& bridge=yes { delete 'ref'; delete 'int_ref'; delete 'name'; } [0x010107 continue resolution 24] > highway=*& tunnel=yes { delete 'ref'; delete 'int_ref'; delete 'name'; } [0x010e00 continue resolution 24] > > In the latest mkgmap, will these work as before? i.e. the bridge/tunnel Nothing will work 'as before' since it was kind of random what happened. It should now work in the intended manner. If you can give me the tags on the way, other relevant lines in the style, and the result you expect I can let you know if it is a bug or not. For a quick test, I get: WAY highway=p bridge=yes ref=A1 <<<lines>>> highway=* & bridge=yes { delete 'ref'; delete 'int_ref'; delete 'name'; } [0x010107 continue resolution 24] railway=* & bridge=yes { delete 'ref'; delete 'int_ref'; delete 'name'; } [0x010107 continue resolution 24] highway=* & tunnel=yes { delete 'ref'; delete 'int_ref'; delete 'name'; } [0x010e00 continue resolution 24] highway=p & bridge=yes [0x2] <<<results>>> WAY 1: Line 0x10107, name=<null>, ref=<null>, res=24-24 (1/1),(2/2), WAY 1: Line 0x2, name=<A1>, ref=<A1>, res=24-24 (1/1),(2/2), Which sounds like the result you were wanting, yes? ..Steve
- Previous message: [mkgmap-dev] Continue behaviour changed?
- Next message: [mkgmap-dev] Continue behaviour changed?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the mkgmap-dev mailing list