[mkgmap-dev] Missing ways part 2

Tue Oct 19 19:07:47 BST 2010

>> Would you happen to have an idea how to tag (and in mkgmap) hide a
>> highway=service tunnel for accessing a railway tunnel?
>>     
>
> This is very much a special case. It is the result of several factors
> working together. One of the factors is that Garmin devices do not give
> a clear indication of whether ways that cross are connected. It is
> possible to use custom style and .TYP files to draw distinctive lines
> for bridges and tunnels, and this would make things clearer.
>
> I've looked at the tagging of way 69679696 and it looks fine. You would
> hide the way by omitting it, as with underground railways, but you need
> a test that you can put in the style file. Naturally, this test must not
> cause the loss of ways you want to keep. You could perhaps add a tag
> "note=mkgmap omit" without stretching the conventions of OSM too far. I
> can't think of any other recognised tag you could use. If you tagged
> "mkgmap=omit" you would be tagging for the renderer and that is
> definitely discouraged.
>
>   
No matter how you name it, "note=mkgamp omit" or "mkgmap=omit". The idea 
behind both is the same bad idea: taging for renderers. You have 
information in the data which is meant to be used by only one single 
renderer.

If you dont want tunnels in your map to show up, then define a 
apropriate style file. Maybe others want to show exactly these tunnels 
in their map.

Johann