[mkgmap-dev] sharp angles and routing

Tue Aug 11 10:43:40 BST 2015

I'm not sure anymore. There was a time when a Basecamp update and device
firmware updates meant that all restrictions were simply ignored. I think
newer Basecamp version corrected that bug again however (Garmin claimed on
their forums such restrictions never existed - so maybe they really did not
use them in their maps?). I'm not sure for the devices though - Got not
much time right now - but I can check with my devices in September (Oregon
600, etrex 30 - Vista HCx was never affected by that bug).

Toll and Unpaved have never been affected either and are really avoided if
set so.

On 11 August 2015 at 11:39, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Felix,
>
> can't believe that Garmin ignores it, can you prove that with the default
> style?
> If not I assume that you create multiple arcs and one allows cycling.
>
> Gerd
>
> ------------------------------
> To: mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> From: extremecarver at gmail.com
> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:31:35 +0200
>
> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] sharp angles and routing
>
> okay - sounds great...
> (as new devices do not really mind mkgmap:bicycle=no it does not matter so
> much anymore - I'm only setting pedestrian restrictions different to all
> others for my maps )
>
> On 11.08.2015 10:57, Gerd Petermann wrote:
>
> Hi Felix,
>
> My current approach is to evaluate the results of the style, so it is up
> to the author to decide what
> a pedestrian-only way is.
> Another point is that we don't need the check for ways which can't be
> accessed
> by bike. I am aware that these checks must be ignored when a special
> cycling
> map is created (or any other special map, we just have to find out
> meaningful
> option names)
>
> I am trying to produce test data to find out in what case Garmin prefers a
> small detour,
> this should help to find concrete rules.
>
> Gerd
>
> ------------------------------
> To: mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> From: extremecarver at gmail.com
> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:44:06 +0200
> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] sharp angles and routing
>
> Well - what is a strict pedestrian only way? highway=pedestrian - often
> can be used with bikes too (going slower)
> highway=footway -- often still outside cities and used for mtbiking though
> maybe not allowed.
> highway=path &  bicycle=no ---> very often nice mtbike trails in countries
> where mtbiking is mainly forbidden like Baden-Wuerttemberg or Austria.
>
>
> And yeah - oneways could be excluded - but needs some care to not exclude
> them (for cycling maps) if oneway:bicycle=no; bicycle:oneway=no;
> oneway:bicycle=both; ( cycleway=* & cycleway!=oneway ) would be the most
> common keys which mean cycling against oneway direction is allowed.
>
> For me excluding all ways that get tagged road-class=0 or 1, and
> road-speed=0 could be excluded (but sometimes I use continue and double
> ways so it exists with say road-class=4, road-speed=2 as well as
> road-class=0, road-speed=0 in order to get me through sharp turns - if the
> sharp angle fixing would work well - maybe I could drop this).
>
> On 11.08.2015 09:52, Gerd Petermann wrote:
>
> Hi Felix,
>
> okay, I just try to find some criteria so that we find those nodes + arcs
> which really cause
> trouble. A lot of sharp angles are between oneway roads which don't allow
> traveleling
> the sharp angle.
> I think that also means that I can add code to ignore sharp angles on
> pedestrian-only
> ways.
>
> Gerd
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 09:39:11 +0200
> From: extremecarver at gmail.com
> To: mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] sharp angles and routing
>
> Well - not in Pedestrian mode. I meant if you design a map with
> road-class=4 as preferred way for pedestrians... Then of course using a non
> pedestrian profile for routing so it chooses road-class=4 or 3 preferably.
> For Pedestrian mode chosen - there is no time penalty for sharp turns -
> though I did not test if it would prefer ways that point towards the
> destination at intersections.
>
> On 11 August 2015 at 09:30, Gerd Petermann <
> <gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Felix,
>
> please check:
> you said that sharp angles also have an effect on pedestrian routing,
> I was not able to reproduce that. Can you give an example?
>
> Gerd
>
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
>
>
>
> --
> Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org
> Floragasse 9/11
> 1040 Wien
> Austria - Österreich
>
> _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing listmkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.ukhttp://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
>
> --
> keep on biking and discovering new trails
>
> Felixopenmtbmap.org & www.velomap.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing listmkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.ukhttp://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
>
> --
> keep on biking and discovering new trails
>
> Felixopenmtbmap.org & www.velomap.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________ 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
>

-- 
Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org
Floragasse 9/11
1040 Wien
Austria - Österreich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/attachments/20150811/56db67b0/attachment.html>