[mkgmap-dev] is_in with own Tags?

Mon Feb 22 09:52:50 GMT 2021

Hi Ticker,

thank you - yes, that explains a lot of my troubles.

But - if I got you right: isn`t this what I need?
	For an area2poi POI, it is almost certain that it is_in(its own type)
	but you can exclude it if is_in(the other types).
Do you have an example for the mentioned exclusion?

Concerning deletion: it seemed to be easier to delete unwanted POIs while testing, but indeed I prefer to handle this by tagging later.
For sure I want to miss as little information as possible, but distinguish the available - I dropped the corresponding naming actions for simplification, and the mopup at the end also ;-)

Jan

> Am 21.02.2021 um 22:32 schrieb Ticker Berkin <rwb-mkgmap at jagit.co.uk>:
> 
> Hi Jan
> 
> I don't think you'll be able to do what you hope for.
> 
> Each possible POI comes either:
> a) direct from a point
> b) from a polygon if --add-pois-to-areas, setting mkgmap:area2poi=true
>   This happens regardless of any rules etc.
> 
> All you can do in the points rule processing is choose to display a POI
> or not.
> 
> For a direct POI, you can test if is_in any of the types of polygon and
> suppress it if you choose.
> 
> For an area2poi POI, it is almost certain that it is_in(its own type)
> but you can exclude it if is_in(the other types).
> 
> There is no is_in() test for being in a polygon (of some type) that is
> in another polygon (of same or any other type). 
> 
> It is clearer to apply these tests to the POI generation rule rather
> than {delete} the tag to be tested. For {delete} to work, it has to be
> done before the rule that might generated the [POI]. It is obscure to
> show the {delete} afterwards, even though, with careful rule ordering,
> the same effect could be achieved. 
> 
> Does this make sense?
> 
> Ticker
> 
> On Sun, 2021-02-21 at 18:04 +0100, jan meisters wrote:
>> (Still problems with attachments. Now with link)
>> 
>> Hi Ticker,
>> 
>> I want to ask for relevant swimmings, one after another, and after
>> every rule exclude further swimmings inside aleady matched areas.
>> In the end the style should dismiss e.g. leisure=swimming_pools which
>> lay in a (leisure=stadium & sport=swimming) already matched:
>> 
>> 1.	leisure=stadium & sport=swimming {name '${name} (stadium
>> swim)‘ | '(stadium swim)'} [0x2d09 resolution 24]
>> 	sport=swimming & is_in(leisure,stadium,in_or_on)=true &
>> is_in(sport,swimming,in_or_on)=true {delete sport}
>> 2.	leisure=water_park & sport=swimming {name '${name}
>> (waterpark swim)‘ | '(waterpark swim)'} [0x2d09 resolution 24]
>> 	sport=swimming & is_in(leisure, water_park,in_or_on)=true &
>> is_in(sport,swimming,in_or_on)=true {delete sport}
>> 3.	leisure=swimming_pool & sport=swimming {name '${name} (pool
>> swim)‘ | ‚(pool swim)'} [0x2d09 resolution 24]
>> 	sport=swimming & is_in(leisure, swimming_pool,in_or_on)=true &
>> is_in(sport,swimming,in_or_on)=true {delete sport}
>> 4.	…
>> 
>> With the above ruleset I have correct results for nodes so far, but
>> not for polygons.
>> The is_in-rule seems to lack the epression of is_n(leisure=stadium &
>> sport=swimming), instead matches a polygons own swimming as well -
>> what I don´t want.
>> But I´ve got no clue how to write it.
>> 
>> In swim.osm the surrounding left stadium has swimming, the right one
>> not. Inside both stadium, water_park and sports_centre as area and
>> poi. (See http://files.mkgmap.org.uk/detail/500 for the following
>> screenshots)
>> 
>> Above ruleset gives this: 1-result.jpg
>> In left stadium pois for stadium/swim (area, area inside, poi
>> inside), nothing else: correct.
>> In right stadium pois for all swim inside except for the areas:
>> wrong.
>> 
>> What I expect is this: 2-expected.jpg
>> Left as before, but In the right pois for all swim inside including
>> areas.
>> 
>> Hope I made it clearer
>> Jan
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 21.02.2021 um 13:01 schrieb Ticker Berkin <
>>> rwb-mkgmap at jagit.co.uk>:
>>> 
>>> Hi Jan
>>> 
>>> I'm slightly confused as to what you are trying to do here when you
>>> say
>>> it works for nodes but not polygons.
>>> 
>>> After you've output a POI from the first rule what are you trying
>>> to
>>> do?
>>> 
>>> Ticker
>>> 
>>> On Sun, 2021-02-21 at 10:42 +0100, jan meisters wrote:
>>>> Hi Gerd,
>>>> 
>>>> my first impression didn´t get trough further test.
>>>> 
>>>> This works for nodes, but not for polygons:
>>>> 	leisure=stadium & sport=swimming [0x2d09 resolution 24]
>>>> 	sport=swimming & is_in(leisure,stadium,in_or_on)=true &
>>>> is_in(sport,swimming,in_or_on)=true {delete sport}
>>>> 
>>>> It matches it´s own swimming tag as well, not only when stadium
>>>> is
>>>> given.
>>>> Tried various spellings/brackets, but I can´t get it to work for
>>>> stadium and swimming as a combination only.
>>>> I guess we don´t have a syntax for this?
>>>> 
>>>> Attached a small example.
>>>> 
>>>> Jan
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> Am 16.02.2021 um 18:28 schrieb jan meisters <jan_m23 at gmx.net>:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Gerd,
>>>>> 
>>>>> so easy - that works!
>>>>> Thanks for helping me out
>>>>> Jan
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Am 16.02.2021 um 17:44 schrieb Gerd Petermann <
>>>>>> gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com>:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Jan,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> is_in(leisure,park,...) & is_in(sport,swimming,...)
>>>>>> should work.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Gerd
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ________________________________________
>>>>>> Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im
>>>>>> Auftrag von jan meisters <jan_m23 at gmx.net>
>>>>>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. Februar 2021 17:31
>>>>>> An: Development list for mkgmap
>>>>>> Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] is_in with own Tags?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Joris,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> thanks for stating - I guessed something like that.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> What I want is to is_in for a tag-combination, e.g.
>>>>>> leisure=park
>>>>>> & sport=swimming.
>>>>>> I have a poi-rule for park&swimming first and further want to
>>>>>> exclude swimmings inside matching polygons.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Do I have another option to define the combination so that it
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> be seen by is_in?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Am 16.02.2021 um 14:48 schrieb Joris Bo <
>>>>>>> jorisbo at hotmail.com>:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi Jan
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> As far as i understood this function really checks the
>>>>>>> polygons
>>>>>>> around the poi to check if the poi-coordinates are located
>>>>>>> within the polygon specified.
>>>>>>> It can not check variables because they don't have an
>>>>>>> outline.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Met vriendelijke groeten,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Joris Bo
>>>>>>> jorisbo at hotmail.com
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>>>>>>> Van: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>
>>>>>>> Namens
>>>>>>> jan meisters
>>>>>>> Verzonden: dinsdag 16 februari 2021 14:12
>>>>>>> Aan: Development list for mkgmap <
>>>>>>> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk>
>>>>>>> Onderwerp: [mkgmap-dev] is_in with own Tags?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I try to use is_in to fetch pois inside own invented tags,
>>>>>>> e.g.:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>   leisure=park {add processed=yes} [0x2c06 resolution 24
>>>>>>> continue with_actions]
>>>>>>>   leisure=swimming_pool &
>>>>>>> is_in(processed,yes,in_or_on)=true
>>>>>>> {delete leisure}
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This fails, however „is_in(leisure,park,in_or_on)=true“
>>>>>>> works
>>>>>>> in the example.
>>>>>>> Could someone explain where I´m wrong?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> Jan
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210222/167b8843/attachment-0001.html>