logo separator

[mkgmap-dev] Missing ways part 2

From Marko Mäkelä marko.makela at iki.fi on Mon Oct 18 19:34:45 BST 2010

On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 06:20:03PM +0100, Adrian wrote:
>In my opinion, tagging with layer=-1 in that particular case is not 
>wrong, but tagging long stretches with layer=-1 would be wrong. Looking 
>at r1445 in the mailing list, it was clearly the intention to hide 
>underground railways. In light of that, I suggest that the mkgmap 
>default style might be modified to test for !(tunnel=yes) instead of 
>!(layer<0), for all four types of railway.

Good idea.

Would you happen to have an idea how to tag (and in mkgmap) hide a 
highway=service tunnel for accessing a railway tunnel? Here is an 
example that I added some time ago: 

Last time I was bicycling/mapping there, I got confused, because I 
thought that there would be a connection between the highway=residential 
(Kaskelanpolku) and the highway=secondary (Lahdentie). Of course, the 
tunnel would not be considered for routing, because the ways share no 
nodes, but the ways seemed to be connected on the map display.


More information about the mkgmap-dev mailing list