[mkgmap-dev] Please test branch NET-no-NOD

Fri Oct 18 11:41:34 BST 2019

Hi Gerd

I've applied the patch to my 'current' version and tried running it but
it gives: 

java.lang.StackOverflowError
        at
uk.me.parabola.imgfmt.app.net.RouteNode.visitNet(RouteNode.java:938)
	at
uk.me.parabola.imgfmt.app.net.RouteNode.visitNet(RouteNode.java:941)
...  1020 lines like this ...
        at
uk.me.parabola.imgfmt.app.net.RouteNode.visitNet(RouteNode.java:941)
        at
uk.me.parabola.imgfmt.app.net.RouteNode.visitNet(RouteNode.java:941)
Exiting - if you want to carry on regardless, use the --keep-going
option

My source had the patches "avoid-to-split-via-ways.patch" and
"only_with_via_ways.patch". I can remove these and try again if you
think there might be an interaction.

I don't think there is a need to try and check on islands of different
access modes; the apparent behaviour of my device is that it finds the
closest highway of any type to get into or out of the main road
network. ie, if here is a footpath closer to the destination that any
motor-vehicle road, car route planning will direct me onto it.

Ticker

On Fri, 2019-10-18 at 09:25 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> Hi Ticker,
> 
> please check: attached is a simple patch that implements the
> calculation of routing islands.
> It just reports islands with less than 5 routing nodes and the
> position of one of the nodes.
> It ignores such islands which have at least one node that is a
> boundary node.
> Remember that we also create nodes oncountry borders. Maybe those
> should be ignored here?
> 
> A more detailed test might also check the access attributes, so that
> we report islands for pedestrian, bicycle etc.
> 
> The patch doesn't change the data written to the img files. Please
> play with it and let me know how it works for you.
> 
> Gerd
> 
> ________________________________________
> Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag
> von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap at jagit.co.uk>
> Gesendet: Samstag, 12. Oktober 2019 19:34
> An: Development list for mkgmap
> Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Please test branch NET-no-NOD
> 
> Hi Gerd
> 
> I was thinking of a threshold (maybe < 5) and then not adding any of
> them to NOD.
> 
> The reason is that a while ago I found many instances where tracks
> lead
> up to the edge of car-parks but didn't join to each other or the car
> -park access road and so walking routing, where one was expected to
> cross the car-park, didn't work. I tried adding a footway around the
> edge of the car-park and this helped in a lot of cases but I got
> driving route-calculation-error in or out of the car-park if the
> access
> road wasn't correctly specified. Your latest change will help in a
> lot
> of instances but sometimes there car-park was defined by more than 1
> line.
> 
> Ticker
> 
> 
> On Sat, 2019-10-12 at 10:10 -0700, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> > Ticker Berkin wrote
> > > Do you attempt to isolate small road networks that are not
> > > connected to
> > > the rest of the system or just a single road?
> > 
> > Not yet. Do you think about some kind of threshold value giving the
> > minimal
> > number of connections or maybe a bbox size or a sum of road
> > lengths?
> > if the
> > isolated network is "small" we might not add any of its roads to
> > NOD.
> > Is that what you think about?
> > 
> > Gerd
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Sent from:
> > http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Mkgmap-Development-f5324443.html
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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