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

Fri Oct 18 16:02:55 BST 2019

Hi Ticker,

okay, I am working on the part that removes those islands from NOD. I am developing it with the NET-no-NOD branch.
With trunk you get higher counts as each end of an unconnected way is also a routing node.

Gerd

________________________________________
Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap at jagit.co.uk>
Gesendet: Freitag, 18. Oktober 2019 16:28
An: Development list for mkgmap
Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Please test branch NET-no-NOD

Hi Gerd

That runs OK.

As before, I get lots of 2 node roads - often bridges over streams in
open land, and quite a few (about 1/10 the number of the 2 noders) are
3 and 4 nodes - frequently paths between buildings in schools /
campuses and short bits of path at either end of the bridges in open
land.

I upped the test from 5 to 10 and got more of the same + networks of
short paths on golf courses, walkways on piers (which should have been
connected to something), paths in an enclosed quadrangle, etc, etc

All of these I would consider to be a hindrance to route calculations.

Having an option, defaulting to, say, 10, to stop these road-islands
being added to NOD must be a good idea. Setting the value to 0 would
give the current behaviour

Ticker

On Fri, 2019-10-18 at 12:35 +0000, Gerd Petermann wrote:
> Hi Ticker,
>
> here is the patch without recursive call.
>
> Gerd
>
> ________________________________________
> Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag
> von Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>
> Gesendet: Freitag, 18. Oktober 2019 12:46
> An: Development list for mkgmap
> Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Please test branch NET-no-NOD
>
> Hi Ticker,
>
> thanks for testing. I'll work on a patch without recursive calls.
>
> Gerd
>
> ________________________________________
> Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag
> von Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap at jagit.co.uk>
> Gesendet: Freitag, 18. Oktober 2019 12:41
> An: Development list for mkgmap
> Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Please test branch NET-no-NOD
>
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev