Wanmil wrote:
the carpool flag in the branch can only be controlled by the tag
mkgmap:carpool.
I don't know if we have to accept the Basecamp handling.
I still don't know if the bit which is toggled by mkgmap:carpool is
really used for carpool handling. I have done some tests with
Mapsource
but I couldn't find *any* difference in the routing behaviour. So no
matter if the carpool flag was set or not and no matter if the carpool
avoidance was set or not, routing was always the same. So I doubt if
the
bit which we call carpool bit really influences carpool handling.
Neither can I see any difference if a road has mkgmap:carpool=yes
or not. So what is the benefit of this mkgmap:carpool tag?
@Steve: did you ever check the impact of the "carpool" bit in the NOD(?)
files? Do you think the bit controls the carpool routing?
Mark Burton introduced this bit in 2010 but with a weired behaviour and
I am not sure if anyone could test it significantly.
See also http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/2009q4/005920.html
WanMil
_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
