[mkgmap-dev] Numbering loss in the version which came after the r3602

Tue Aug 18 19:40:40 BST 2015

Hi Gerd,

I'm sorry the delay to answer, but I came on vacation and had many pending
issues waiting for me.
Regard this specific issue, your interpretation of the problem of
duplication/overlap in the numbering interpolation is correct. In fact the
data doesn't make sense and I agree with you that this case is an error in
the data.

To prove this, I got the short example sent before and correctly input the
numbers eliminating the overlapping as shown below:

[image: Imagem inline 3]

And then I compiled the map with mkgmap versions 3612 and 3629 (the last
one I found) and the numbers were not "missed" this time, proving you
theory.

*Snapshot taken form MapSource of a map compiled wiht mkgmap r3612*
[image: Imagem inline 1]

*Snapshot taken form MapSource of a map compiled wiht mkgmap r3629*
[image: Imagem inline 2]

So I think we can close the case and I have some work do clean the maps of
my group.

Thanks again for your attention and analysis.

Best regards,

Alexandre Loss

2015-07-21 9:06 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Loss <alexandre.loss at gmail.com>:

> Hi Gerd and Steve,
>
> Thanks by your attention.
> I'm in vocation now and without access to my computer, so I can't provide
> more information if you need till my return in beginning of August.
> But I think that the data is correct because in despite the streets have
> the same name, they are different road since they aren't connect (there is
> a gap / a block between them).
> So I believe that the algo couldn't consider the name of street.
> But I understand your point of view, since it looks that can have a number
> overlapping/shadow of both streets, what would be a logical error.
>
> Unfortunately, I can make more  test these days but as soon I come back I
> will.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alexandre
>
> (Enviado via iPad)
>
> Em 21/07/2015, às 06:21, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>
> escreveu:
>
> Hi Alexandre,
>
> I think the problem here is that you have two ways named "RUA PORTO
> ALEGRE",
> one with id 2, the other with id 46, and both are in the same city.
> So far no problem, but the addr:interpolation ways on those two roads
> also produce a bunch of duplicate numbers.
> As a result, the new algo decides to ignore them.
> Unfortunately, the log
> FEIN: uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.osmstyle.housenumber.HousenumberGenerator
> e:\testdata\03205200-vila_velha.osm: keeping duplicate numbers assigned to
> different roads in cluster  RUA PORTO ALEGRE 2(0) 2(1)
> FEIN: uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.osmstyle.housenumber.HousenumberGenerator
> e:\testdata\03205200-vila_velha.osm: keeping duplicate numbers assigned to
> different roads in cluster  RUA PORTO ALEGRE 3(0) 3(1)
> FEIN: uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.osmstyle.housenumber.HousenumberIvl
> e:\testdata\03205200-vila_velha.osm: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/13
> 800..2, step=2 generated even interpolated number(s) for id=2, RUA PORTO
> ALEGRE
> FEIN: uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.osmstyle.housenumber.HousenumberIvl
> e:\testdata\03205200-vila_velha.osm: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/14
> 801..3, step=2 generated odd interpolated number(s) for id=2, RUA PORTO
> ALEGRE
> FEIN: uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.osmstyle.housenumber.HousenumberIvl
> e:\testdata\03205200-vila_velha.osm: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/65
> 419..205, step=2 generated odd interpolated number(s) for id=46, RUA PORTO
> ALEGRE
> FEIN: uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.osmstyle.housenumber.HousenumberIvl
> e:\testdata\03205200-vila_velha.osm: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/65
> 203..3, step=2 generated odd interpolated number(s) for id=46, RUA PORTO
> ALEGRE
> FEIN: uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.osmstyle.housenumber.HousenumberIvl
> e:\testdata\03205200-vila_velha.osm: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/66
> 418..204, step=2 generated even interpolated number(s) for id=46, RUA PORTO
> ALEGRE
> FEIN: uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.osmstyle.housenumber.HousenumberIvl
> e:\testdata\03205200-vila_velha.osm: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/66
> 202..2, step=2 generated even interpolated number(s) for id=46, RUA PORTO
> ALEGRE
> FEIN: uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.osmstyle.housenumber.HousenumberGenerator
> e:\testdata\03205200-vila_velha.osm: found problems with interpolated
> numbers from addr:interpolations ways for roads with name RUA PORTO ALEGRE
>
>
> is not very clear about the reason and the final action, but I think the
> data is not okay and the algo is correct
> to ignore it.
>
> What do you think?
> Gerd
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 15:28:04 -0300
> From: alexandre.loss at gmail.com
> To: mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> CC: Adm_Tec_Tracksource at googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Numbering loss in the version which came after
> the r3602
>
> Hi Andrzej,
>
> Ok, thank you for your time and analyses.
> Lets wait for Gerd.
>
> regards,
> Alexandre
>
>
> 2015-06-17 13:13 GMT-03:00 Andrzej Popowski <popej at poczta.onet.pl>:
>
> Hi Alexandre,
>
> I confirm, that there is no address on your map with current mkgmap. Data
> seems to be OK, so lets wait for Gerd opinion.
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Andrzej
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/attachments/20150818/843afbf7/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 26591 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/attachments/20150818/843afbf7/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 27500 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/attachments/20150818/843afbf7/attachment-0004.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 35188 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/attachments/20150818/843afbf7/attachment-0005.png>