[mkgmap-dev] Missing ways part 2From aighes h.scholland at googlemail.com on Tue Oct 19 08:51:59 BST 2010
Marko Mäkelä wrote: > > 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. > Hi, maybe this rules before your highway-rules in lines-file would solve your problem: bridge=yes | bridge=true [0x28 resolution 21 continue] tunnel=yes | tunnel=true [0x27 resolution 21 continue] aighes -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Missing-ways-part-2-tp5647895p5649892.html Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
- Previous message: [mkgmap-dev] Missing ways part 2
- Next message: [mkgmap-dev] Missing ways part 2
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the mkgmap-dev mailing list