<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>Hi WanMil,<br><br>okay, if you don't want to add two ways, please make sure that <br>access=private also sets mkgmap:truck=no<br><br>Gerd<br><br><div>> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 11:20:02 +0200<br>> From: wmgcnfg@web.de<br>> To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<br>> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] [PATCH v1] Rework of inc/access<br>> <br>> Hi Gerd,<br>> <br>> > Hi WanMil,<br>> ><br>> > besides the error reported by Stéphane here are my 50 cents after a first<br>> > compare<br>> > with the unpatched default style:<br>> ><br>> > I am not sure, but I think tags like<br>> > vehicle=private, motor_vehicle=private etc.<br>> > should not set<br>> > mkgmap:emergency=no<br>> ><br>> > My interpretation regarding routing is that<br>> > it is equivalent with xxx=destination,<br>> > so it should set the no-throughroute bit.<br>> ><br>> > Reason:<br>> > If one wants to visit someone living at a private way, we can assume that<br>> > he is allowed to go there. On the other hand, a route restriction<br>> > like a no_left_turn might be ignored if the road in the img file<br>> > doesn't allow any vehicle.<br>> ><br>> > The problem : We have only one no-troughroute bit for each road segment, so<br>> > a way with highway=*, access=private, bicycle=yes, foot=yes<br>> > has to be added as two roads, one with acces for all vehicles except bike<br>> > and no-throughroute=true,<br>> > the other with full access for bikes and pedestrian.<br>> > This can't be done in the finalize rules, right?<br>> <br>> From my point of view duplication of ways should be done only if there <br>> is a very hard reason for it.<br>> I don't see the case here. Private ways are private and should not be <br>> used by anyone. Emergency vehicles should not use it anyhow. In case the <br>> private way is the target Garmin will ignore the access bits (as far as <br>> I know) and will route over the non accessible way.<br>> <br>> Anyhow I think I haven't fully understood what the throughroute bit means.<br>> <br>> Having the following road network:<br>> S<br>> |<br>> 1=======2====T==3<br>> | |<br>> | |<br>> 4---------------5<br>> <br>> S = starting point<br>> T = target point<br>> <number> = start/end point of a road segment<br>> |- = usual road (nothroughroute bit not set)<br>> = = road with nothroughroute bit set<br>> <br>> How does Garmin route?<br>> Does it choose the direct way over the two nothroughroute ways (S-1-2-T)?<br>> Or does it choose the detour (S-1-4-5-3-T) because it does not route <br>> over adjacent ways with the nothroughroute bit set?<br>> <br>> WanMil<br>> <br>> ><br>> > Gerd<br>> > Gerd<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > WanMil wrote<br>> >> Hi,<br>> >><br>> >> attached is a reworked inc/access file.<br>> >><br>> >> It now uses a 1:1 assignment between OSM tag and mkgmap access tag:<br>> >> foot=* { set mkgmap:foot='${foot}' }<br>> >> bicycle=* { set mkgmap:bicycle='${bicycle}' }<br>> >> motorcar=* { set mkgmap:car='${motorcar}' }<br>> >> goods=* { set mkgmap:delivery='${goods}' }<br>> >> hgv=* { set mkgmap:truck='${hgv}' }<br>> >> bus=* { set mkgmap:bus='${bus}' }<br>> >> taxi=* { set mkgmap:taxi='${taxi}' }<br>> >> emergency=* { set mkgmap:emergency='${emergency}' }<br>> >><br>> >><br>> >> motorcycle is no longer used. There is no clean solution when motorcycle<br>> >> != motorcar. The default style supports motorcars. Users that want to<br>> >> use the cards especially for motorcycling should modify their inc/access<br>> >> file appropriately.<br>> >><br>> >> delivery is no longer used. It is not an access key. The wiki notes:<br>> >> The key delivery is mostly used with the value yes to indicate that the<br>> >> restaurant offers delivery of your meal.<br>> >><br>> >> More access keys are used. They are taken into account obeying the rules<br>> >> of vehicle subclasses (set motorcar=no if motor_vehicle=no or vehicle=no<br>> >> etc.).<br>> >><br>> >> The old rule<br>> >> highway=path { add foot=yes; add access=no }<br>> >> did not work for the way [highway=path; access=no]. This way should not<br>> >> be used by foot anyway but the rule above errorneously allowed foot.<br>> >> This is fixed now.<br>> >><br>> >> carpool handling is now disabled. It does not work (as far as I know) so<br>> >> the rules are not useful.<br>> >><br>> >> Many thanks to Mario Hantschke who worked out some problems of the old<br>> >> access file and provided some good ideas for the new rules.<br>> >><br>> >> Please check the new rules. If you are unhappy with some assignements<br>> >> please post an tagging example of a way and how you think the access<br>> >> rules should be assigned.<br>> >><br>> >> Have fun!<br>> >> WanMil<br>> >><br>> >> _______________________________________________<br>> >> mkgmap-dev mailing list<br>> ><br>> >> mkgmap-dev@.org<br>> ><br>> >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev<br>> >><br>> >> access (3K)<br>> >> &lt;http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/attachment/5803532/0/access&gt;<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > --<br>> > View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/PATCH-v1-Rework-of-inc-access-tp5803532p5803542.html<br>> > Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.<br>> > _______________________________________________<br>> > mkgmap-dev mailing list<br>> > mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<br>> > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev<br>> ><br>> <br>> _______________________________________________<br>> mkgmap-dev mailing list<br>> mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<br>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev<br></div> </div></body>
</html>