[mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions

Fri Apr 6 07:46:51 BST 2018

You can ask Frederik for it, but it's based on a database. There should be some old python code for it in the wiki work with osm data.

Henning 

On 5 Apr 2018, 14:46, at 14:46, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com> wrote:
>Hi Henning,
>
>yes, it is quite astonishing that some of these errors exists since
>years, esp. in well mapped areas.
>I tried to find the source code for OSM Inspector but it seems this is
>closed source owned by Geofabrik?
>
>Gerd
>
>________________________________________
>Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von
>Henning Scholland <osm at hscholland.de>
>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 16:11:35
>An: Development list for mkgmap
>Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
>
>It seems to be more easy to promote OSM Inspector and fix those
>faults... 😎
>Henning
>On 4 Apr 2018, at 21:55, Gerd Petermann
><gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>>
>wrote:
>
>Hi Felix,
>
>Maybe we have different ideas what merging of labels means.
>With r4149 I've implemented this:
>If way w1 has e.g. mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" and mkgmap:label:2 =
>"N 232" (a ref)
>and way w2 has only mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street" mkgmap adds
>mkgmap:label:2  from the first way.
>Also if w2 has e.g. mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Place" the merged result
>would be
>mkgmap:label:1 = "Main Street"
>mkgmap:label:2 = "N 232"
>mkgmap:label:3 = "Main Place"
>I did not yet test if that really works with address search, also there
>is no method to detect which way is w1 and which is w2.
>Probably order of appearance.
>
>Another option would be to somehow concatenate labels, esp. those from
>ref tags, but I have no idea how to code that
>as every style might use differents ways to combine refs.
>
>Gerd
>
>________________________________
>
>Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von
>Felix Hartmann <extremecarver at gmail.com>
>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 12:46:44
>An: Development list for mkgmap
>Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
>
>okay that's fine. I think the result will lead to nearly no more actual
>problem cases...
>
>On 4 April 2018 at 12:44, Gerd Petermann
><gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>>
>wrote:
>Hi Felix,
>
>you may try r4147. I plan to add code to merge different labels of
>overlapping ways, I think I can't do much more.
>
>Gerd
>
>________________________________
>
>Von: mkgmap-dev
><mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>
>im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann
><extremecarver at gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver at gmail.com>>
>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 11:44:05
>An: Development list for mkgmap
>Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
>
>Yes I think that could be problematic. I'm not sure how it will end up.
>I do not create routable lines from the relations file directly, I use
>the set command and then in the lines file the additional ways are
>created - so that if one line has 1 or X route relations, there will be
>no difference. However that assumes they are all added to the same line
>I guess. So if different routes are copied onto different overlapping
>ways this principle would go wrong - it won't be a problem if the
>underlying overlaying ways are moved/merged before the handling of the
>relations however.
>
>I have so far seen mostly cases where two overlaying ways were both
>part of the same route relation - not of different route relations.
>
>On 4 April 2018 at 11:10, Gerd Petermann
><gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>>>
>wrote:
>Hi Felix,
>
>well, you started to mention route relations:
>"The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations
>on the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's
>best to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other
>one."
>My understanding is that the code in mkgmap doesn't have to care about
>route relations (e.g. type=route, route=bicycle), this is done in the
>style. With your style those might cause more trouble because you add
>more routable lines for the members but the current overlap remover
>will only remove segments with more or less identical attributes.
>What you suggest requires a completely different approach, right?
>
>Gerd
>
>________________________________
>
>Von: mkgmap-dev
><mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>
>im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann
><extremecarver at gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver at gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver at gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver at gmail.com>>>
>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:58:43
>An: Development list for mkgmap
>Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
>
>yes I know - but even though both ways you linked have different turn
>restriction ID - the content of the turn restriction is identical (only
>straight on).
>
>On 4 April 2018 at 10:54, Gerd Petermann
><gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>>>>
>wrote:
>Hi Felix,
>
>yes, 1) would handle the case in my example.
>Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations.
>
>Gerd
>
>________________________________
>
>Von: mkgmap-dev
><mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>>
>im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann
><extremecarver at gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver at gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver at gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver at gmail.com>><mailto:extremecarver at gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver at gmail.com><mailto:extremecarver at gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver at gmail.com>>>>
>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20
>An: Development list for mkgmap
>Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions
>
>For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's
>hard to find out what the outcome should be.
>The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on
>the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best
>to just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one.
>
>The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both
>restriction relations are identical - so one way including the
>restriction relation can be removed, the route relations copied over.
>If the restriction is having different rules - then however I don't
>think we can solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have
>overlapping ways in OSM which are oneway and opposite to each other -
>this is a rare case where overlapping ways are not to be removed I
>guess).
>
>
>
>On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann
><GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com><mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com<mailto:GPetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>>>>>
>wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when
>it finds overlapping road segments and
>one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction
>relation.  This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible.
>
>The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are
>members of (different) restriction relations:
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008
>
>(I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess)
>
>I see different possibilities:
>1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which
>are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning
>2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations
>3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction
>
>I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for
>such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input
>data here.
>What do you think?
>
>Gerd
>
>
>________________________________
>
>mkgmap-dev mailing list
>mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>><mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>>
>http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
>
>
>--
>Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org> &
>VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org>
>Schusterbergweg 32/8
>6020 Innsbruck
>Austria - Österreich
>________________________________
>
>mkgmap-dev mailing list
>mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>><mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>>
>http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
>
>
>--
>Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org> &
>VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org>
>Schusterbergweg 32/8
>6020 Innsbruck
>Austria - Österreich
>________________________________
>
>mkgmap-dev mailing list
>mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>
>http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
>
>
>--
>Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org> &
>VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org>
>Schusterbergweg 32/8
>6020 Innsbruck
>Austria - Österreich
>________________________________
>
>mkgmap-dev mailing list
>mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>
>http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
>
>
>--
>Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org<http://Openmtbmap.org> &
>VeloMap.org<http://VeloMap.org>
>Schusterbergweg 32/8
>6020 Innsbruck
>Austria - Österreich
>________________________________
>
>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/20180406/8692a052/attachment-0001.html>