On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 04:27:23PM +0100, Gerd Petermann wrote:
attached is a patch for the high-prec-coord branch to perform the
dead-end-check in StyledConverter.
I did not remove the original code, so both tests are performed now. I
think this helps to find differences.
Thanks! This looks verbose enough for my taste:
2014/01/02 19:42:16 WARNING (StyledConverter): 63240004.osm.pbf: Oneway
road 55835321 with tags
[oneway=yes,mkgmap:street=Pentinkaarre,name=Pentinkaarre,mkgmap:label:1=Pentinkaarre,highway=living_street,surface=paved]
goes to nowhere at
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=62.262185&mlon=24.710546&zoom=17
Maybe you could filter out the generated mkgmap:* tags, but I am OK with
it. I guess that the logging output is too verbose to be read directly
by a human anyway (without any searching or filtering, that is).
This way is (was) P-shaped. The oneway=yes would be OK for the D-shaped
loop of the P, but not for the 'foot'. I fixed this particular error,
but left others there, so that we can do more cross-checking with
subsequent patches.
I got 23 Oneway warnings with your branch+patch, and 13 with trunk. The
differences are as follows, after filtering out timestamps and sorting
both outputs:
* Different coordinates for the 13 old messages (as expected; this is
thanks to the higher precision)
* 'Extra' warning for the ways: 55835321 23152992 64148077 167346021
* 'Missing' warning for the ways: 200035193 220389737 25455464 42191422
53197410 131648853 50118184
The 'missing' warnings could be because the ways are connected to other
ways for which map is not being generated, such as a
highway=service,oneway=yes leading to a
highway=service,oneway=yes,tunnel=yes,... that is omitted from the map.
IMO the 'missing' warnings should be emitted; we should be checking that
the generated map makes sense.
Please note that both checks will not recognize restriction relations
which prohibit to enter or leave a oneway.
Right. Ignorance is bliss. :)
A related note with oneways is that some mappers seem to generate
redundant turn restrictions for oneways. For example, they would add a
relation that prevents turning against the oneway from a motorway_link
to the motorway lane. I wonder if we should emit warnings for such
redundant relations?
Best regards,
Marko
_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
