[mkgmap-dev] Suppressing dead-end-checks for parking entrance/exit

Wed Mar 20 17:22:35 GMT 2013

Hallo Herr Samadi,

ich hoffe, Ihnen geht es wieder besser. Machen Sie bitte neue Terminvorschläge.

mfg
Gerd Petermann 

> Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 00:05:00 +0200
> From: marko.makela at iki.fi
> To: mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Suppressing dead-end-checks for parking entrance/exit
> 
> Hi Gerd,
> 
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 08:11:25AM +0100, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> >attached is version 2 of the patch which checks only first and last 
> >node of a road.
> 
> Thanks! I finally tested this, and it looked OK with my fabricated data 
> and style file patch, which did { add fixme=yes } to some nodes.
> 
> >Please check:
> >I think the code in RouteNode.reportDeadEnds() does not report a dead 
> >end oneway if the routeNode contains a normal (twoway) road because 
> >both flags noWayOut and noWayIn are set to false in this case. Is this 
> >intended?
> 
> I did not implement the dead-end checks. I believe it was Mark Burton, 
> who no longer is active in the project. Can you draw ASCII art of the 
> situation? For example, using the following legend:
> 
> = means two-way road
> > means one-way road
> | means dead-end
> 
> The cases |==== or ====| should not emit any warning; these should be 
> common for highway=residential and highway=service etc.
> 
> ====>>>>>| should emit a warning 'goes nowhere'
> ====<<<<<| should emit a warning 'comes from nowhere'
> ====>>>>>==== no warning
> ====<<<<<==== no warning
> 
> This is my reasoning; I did not test the actual behaviour. Which case 
> did you have in mind?
> 
> 	Marko
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://lists.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/attachments/20130320/32033079/attachment.html 