[mkgmap-dev] Test cases for possible is-in-hook

Sat Dec 21 09:02:52 GMT 2019

Hi all,

this is a follow up of http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/Commit-r4398-revert-changes-from-r4397-is-in-landuse-option-tp5953750p5954041.html
Attached is a new file which contains additional ways w28 .. w30 and w26 was changed from expected="?" to "in".
The new ways are all very close to the residential polygon(s), but completely outside. 
I think w26 and w30 show very common cases in OSM. Some mappers prefer to "glue" landuse polygons to highways, others don't. There are probably good reasons for both methods. Because of the poor precision the current code in mkgmap adds mkgmap:residential to both of them. See 
http://gis.19327.n8.nabble.com/is-in-filter-tp5890564p5890566.html
where Carlos stated that this would be welcomed (at least if the ways were e.g. highway=secondary instead of footway).
If I change the code to be a lot more precise w30 would not be tagged. 
On the other hand, if you ask for landuse=cemetery you probably don't want to change a cycleway next to it.
Any ideas how to handle this dilemma? 

Gerd

P.S. In my hometown the cemetery expanded during the years and it now stretches across a residential road "Lehmkuhlenweg".  
See https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/11760536
I think in reality the cemetery is split into two parts, there are gates on the footways and barrier=fence or barrier=hedges along the road, but nobody mapped them until now.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: is-in-hook-samples-v2.osm
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 40222 bytes
Desc: is-in-hook-samples-v2.osm
URL: <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/attachments/20191221/524ad5a1/attachment-0001.obj>