[mkgmap-dev] Problem with turn restriction

Tue Feb 4 20:33:09 GMT 2014

Hi WanMil,

with your patch I see more messages for my Niedersachsen data, 
but not a single one starts with "Late invalid".

Maybe you are looking at an old result file?

Gerd

> Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 21:21:31 +0100
> From: wmgcnfg at web.de
> To: mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Problem with turn restriction
> 
> Hi Gerd,
> 
> your fixes for 3) were already sorted out by my checks. So relations 
> without via coord in the bbox were not counted.
> 
> I wonder why your fixes for 1) do not help. I have expected that it 
> removes some of the 851 problems...
> 
> By the way:
> 2) mmh, I don't mind adding that but I think it can be addressed with 
> very low priority. If there is a street where u-turns are not allowed 
> the street should be mapped with separate ways for each direction 
> (that's my opinion - don't know if that matches with the official 
> mapping guidelines).
> 
> 4) Ok, they can be ignored. Would be great if we can detect them to 
> output different log messages for them.
> 
> WanMil
> 
> > Hi WanMil,
> >
> > that's strange. With r3000 I saw many problems for Niedersachen, with
> > r3002 only 4, and those were the two examples.
> >
> > I am downloading latest Germany now.
> >
> > Gerd
> >
> >
> >
> > WanMil wrote
> >> Hi Gerd,
> >>
> >> I think your changes are good.
> >> Anyhow for my special purpose I don't see any difference after your fixes.
> >> So I will explain what and how I am checking the restrictions (see
> >> attached patch with the check code).
> >>
> >> All restrictions that are valid after loading but which cannot be
> >> written to the map because there is a problem when the
> >> RestrictionRelation.addRestriction(..) is called are logged with the
> >> (not very useful...) text "Late invalid: "+URL of restriction.
> >>
> >> See relation_problems.txt with the results. There are 851 problems in
> >> Germany using the tiles created with attached areas.list.
> >>
> >> I am not sure if really all logged restrictions are completely valid but
> >> all I checked should make its way into the mkgmap compiled map.
> >>
> >> I hope this helps you to find some other problematic places!
> >>
> >> WanMil
> >>
> >>> Hi WanMil,
> >>>
> >>> up to now I found these reasons for problems:
> >>> 1) one error in the branch: via coords were replaced without updating
> >>> the corrresponding restrictions and the hash map
> >>> 2) "no_u_turn" restrictions were not added
> >>> if from-way and to-way are equal. They are evaluated to be valid, but
> >>> I don't know if they really make sense?
> >>> 3) restrictions are added to the restrictions hash map even if the via
> >>> coord is
> >>> not contained in the bounding box.
> >>>
> >>> 4) restrictions that have a from-way or to-way which
> >>> is not added with a routable type or not at all,
> >>> e.g. way http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/225540783
> >>> has no tags but is part of three restriction relations.
> >>> Another example:
> >>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2880411
> >>> refers to ways that are tagged lane=tertiary
> >>> and the default style ignores them.
> >>>
> >>> In high-prec-coords branch r3003 I've fixed 1) to 3), please
> >>> check again.
> >>>
> >>> Gerd
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>   > Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 13:01:40 -0800
> >>>   > From:
> >
> >> gpetermann_muenchen@
> >
> >>>   > To:
> >
> >> mkgmap-dev at .org
> >
> >>>   > Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Problem with turn restriction
> >>>   >
> >>>   > WanMil wrote
> >>>   > >> I want to make a small statistic why restriction relations become
> >>>   > >> invalid. Maybe the problem is so seldom that it's not worthy...
> >>>   > >
> >>>   > > I have made a short stat with the high-prec branch:
> >>>   > > There are around 850 relations that are valid
> >>>   > > (RestrictionRelation.isValid() == true) after loading but that are
> >>> not
> >>>   > > valid when the StyledConverter calls
> >>>   > > RestrictionRelations.convertRelation(MapCollector ...).
> >>>   > > So it seems to me as if the problem is greater than expected.
> >>>   >
> >>>   > Yes, sounds too much. The only good case that I can think of
> >>>   > is that the relation is saved by splitter because one of the
> >>>   > related ways has at least one point within the boundary, but
> >>>   > another part of the relation is outside of the boundary.
> >>>   > If the via node is within the tile boundary we should be able
> >>>   > to create the restriction.
> >>>   >
> >>>   > Gerd
> >>>   >
> >>>   >
> >>>   >
> >>>   > --
> >>>   > View this message in context:
> >>> http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Problem-with-turn-restriction-tp5795049p5795167.html
> >>>   > Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >>>   > _______________________________________________
> >>>   > mkgmap-dev mailing list
> >>>   >
> >
> >> mkgmap-dev at .org
> >
> >>>   > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> >>>
> >
> >> mkgmap-dev at .org
> >
> >>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> >
> >> mkgmap-dev at .org
> >
> >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> >>
> >> relation_check.patch (1K)
> >> &lt;http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/attachment/5795291/0/relation_check.patch&gt;
> >> areas.list (14K)
> >> &lt;http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/attachment/5795291/1/areas.list&gt;
> >> relation_problems.txt (71K)
> >> &lt;http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/attachment/5795291/2/relation_problems.txt&gt;
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Problem-with-turn-restriction-tp5795049p5795294.html
> > Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20140204/de58ae9d/attachment-0001.html>