[mkgmap-dev] [PATCH] --ignore-builtin-relations

Sun Apr 17 10:45:40 BST 2011

Am 17.04.2011 10:21, schrieb Marko Mäkelä:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 09:04:18AM +0200, Josef Latt wrote:
>> Am 16.04.2011 17:10, schrieb Josef Latt:
>>> Or, a member of a relation is a highway and the relation itself has 
>>> tag highway=.. both ways lie upon each other. Maybe there can be 
>>> solution in the styles. But this is to high for me.
>>
>> Example for the above und BTW I don't understand the scope of such 
>> constructs.
>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.5721489&lon=7.2946530&zoom=18
> 
> I downloaded this in JOSM. The landuse=residential multipolygon 
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1535811 looks incorrect.
> 
> I guess that you are referring to the highway=pedestrian multipolygon on 
> the west. Its west border is a way that has highway=service. Pedestrian 
> areas are a normal thing to have, but I would not use highways as area 
> borders. The highway line should be drawn on the centerline of way, and 
> I would expect the pedestrian plaza to be separated from the centerline 
> of the highway=service in some way. Either the highway=service way is 
> completely inside the highway=pedestrian area, or the highway=service 
> way should be completely outside the pedestrian area.

Yes, that's one thing. The other is the complete construct, which
consists of 3 relations. IMHO an overkill as well as other simple areas
in this region which are mapped as multipolygons.

I would prefer, mapping the hole area as amenity=school and highways and
building on it.

Because of those constructs I voted for this option meaning that than I
have in may card only the highways.
The multipolygons are drawn with ways without tags. Are they gone too
with this patch: When not how can I do this?

> In other words, this looks like bad mapping. If you feed this to any 
> software, you can expect GIGO (garbage in, garbage out).

ACK

Josef

-- 
PGP Schlüssel: 311D1055
http://keyserver.pgp.com