Hi Gerd,
I get an exception when running the branch:
java.lang.NullPointerException
at
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.general.RoadNetwork.addRestriction(RoadNetwork.java:275)
at
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.general.MapDetails.addRestriction(MapDetails.java:130)
at
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.osmstyle.StyledConverter.createRouteRestrictionsFromPOI(StyledConverter.java:855)
at
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.osmstyle.StyledConverter.end(StyledConverter.java:587)
at
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.reader.osm.ElementSaver.convert(ElementSaver.java:239)
at
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.reader.osm.bin.OsmBinMapDataSource.load(OsmBinMapDataSource.java:67)
at
uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.reader.osm.OsmMapDataSource.load(OsmMapDataSource.java:127)
at uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.main.MapMaker.loadFromFile(MapMaker.java:167)
at uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.main.MapMaker.makeMap(MapMaker.java:63)
at uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.main.Main$1.call(Main.java:220)
at uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.main.Main$1.call(Main.java:1)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(Unknown Source)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
I'll try again with assertions enabled to find the restriction which
causes the problem.
WanMil
no problem.
I also think your patch is also complaining about invalid restrictions
with the wrong messages.
Attached my proposal.
Gerd
> Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 21:44:33 +0100
> From: wmgc...@web.de
> To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Problem with turn restriction
>
> Arghhh....
> I started mkgmap from the wrong workspace. I should have been more
> alarmed that I got exactly the same number of problems!
>
> Ok, I will try again and hopefully the number of problems will be
> reduced *very* much.
>
> Sorry!!
> WanMil
>
> > Hi WanMil,
> >
> > with your patch I see more messages for my Niedersachsen data,
> > but not a single one starts with "Late invalid".
> >
> > Maybe you are looking at an old result file?
> >
> > Gerd
> >
> > > Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 21:21:31 +0100
> > > From: wmgc...@web.de
> > > To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> > > Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Problem with turn restriction
> > >
> > > Hi Gerd,
> > >
> > > your fixes for 3) were already sorted out by my checks. So relations
> > > without via coord in the bbox were not counted.
> > >
> > > I wonder why your fixes for 1) do not help. I have expected that it
> > > removes some of the 851 problems...
> > >
> > > By the way:
> > > 2) mmh, I don't mind adding that but I think it can be addressed with
> > > very low priority. If there is a street where u-turns are not allowed
> > > the street should be mapped with separate ways for each direction
> > > (that's my opinion - don't know if that matches with the official
> > > mapping guidelines).
> > >
> > > 4) Ok, they can be ignored. Would be great if we can detect them to
> > > output different log messages for them.
> > >
> > > WanMil
> > >
> > > > Hi WanMil,
> > > >
> > > > that's strange. With r3000 I saw many problems for
Niedersachen, with
> > > > r3002 only 4, and those were the two examples.
> > > >
> > > > I am downloading latest Germany now.
> > > >
> > > > Gerd
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > WanMil wrote
> > > >> Hi Gerd,
> > > >>
> > > >> I think your changes are good.
> > > >> Anyhow for my special purpose I don't see any difference after
> > your fixes.
> > > >> So I will explain what and how I am checking the restrictions (see
> > > >> attached patch with the check code).
> > > >>
> > > >> All restrictions that are valid after loading but which cannot be
> > > >> written to the map because there is a problem when the
> > > >> RestrictionRelation.addRestriction(..) is called are logged
with the
> > > >> (not very useful...) text "Late invalid: "+URL of restriction.
> > > >>
> > > >> See relation_problems.txt with the results. There are 851
problems in
> > > >> Germany using the tiles created with attached areas.list.
> > > >>
> > > >> I am not sure if really all logged restrictions are completely
> > valid but
> > > >> all I checked should make its way into the mkgmap compiled map.
> > > >>
> > > >> I hope this helps you to find some other problematic places!
> > > >>
> > > >> WanMil
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hi WanMil,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> up to now I found these reasons for problems:
> > > >>> 1) one error in the branch: via coords were replaced without
updating
> > > >>> the corrresponding restrictions and the hash map
> > > >>> 2) "no_u_turn" restrictions were not added
> > > >>> if from-way and to-way are equal. They are evaluated to be
valid, but
> > > >>> I don't know if they really make sense?
> > > >>> 3) restrictions are added to the restrictions hash map even if
> > the via
> > > >>> coord is
> > > >>> not contained in the bounding box.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> 4) restrictions that have a from-way or to-way which
> > > >>> is not added with a routable type or not at all,
> > > >>> e.g. way http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/225540783
> > > >>> has no tags but is part of three restriction relations.
> > > >>> Another example:
> > > >>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2880411
> > > >>> refers to ways that are tagged lane=tertiary
> > > >>> and the default style ignores them.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> In high-prec-coords branch r3003 I've fixed 1) to 3), please
> > > >>> check again.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Gerd
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> > Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 13:01:40 -0800
> > > >>> > From:
> > > >
> > > >> gpetermann_muenchen@
> > > >
> > > >>> > To:
> > > >
> > > >> mkgmap-dev@.org
> > > >
> > > >>> > Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Problem with turn restriction
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > WanMil wrote
> > > >>> > >> I want to make a small statistic why restriction relations
> > become
> > > >>> > >> invalid. Maybe the problem is so seldom that it's not
worthy...
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > I have made a short stat with the high-prec branch:
> > > >>> > > There are around 850 relations that are valid
> > > >>> > > (RestrictionRelation.isValid() == true) after loading but
> > that are
> > > >>> not
> > > >>> > > valid when the StyledConverter calls
> > > >>> > > RestrictionRelations.convertRelation(MapCollector ...).
> > > >>> > > So it seems to me as if the problem is greater than expected.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Yes, sounds too much. The only good case that I can think of
> > > >>> > is that the relation is saved by splitter because one of the
> > > >>> > related ways has at least one point within the boundary, but
> > > >>> > another part of the relation is outside of the boundary.
> > > >>> > If the via node is within the tile boundary we should be able
> > > >>> > to create the restriction.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > Gerd
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > --
> > > >>> > View this message in context:
> > > >>>
> >
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Problem-with-turn-restriction-tp5795049p5795167.html
> > > >>> > Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at
> > Nabble.com.
> > > >>> > _______________________________________________
> > > >>> > mkgmap-dev mailing list
> > > >>> >
> > > >
> > > >> mkgmap-dev@.org
> > > >
> > > >>> > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> > > >>>
> > > >
> > > >> mkgmap-dev@.org
> > > >
> > > >>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> > > >
> > > >> mkgmap-dev@.org
> > > >
> > > >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> > > >>
> > > >> relation_check.patch (1K)
> > > >>
> >
<http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/attachment/5795291/0/relation_check.patch>
> > > >> areas.list (14K)
> > > >>
<http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/attachment/5795291/1/areas.list>
> > > >> relation_problems.txt (71K)
> > > >>
> >
<http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/attachment/5795291/2/relation_problems.txt>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > View this message in context:
> >
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Problem-with-turn-restriction-tp5795049p5795294.html
> > > > Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > mkgmap-dev mailing list
> > > > mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> > > > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > mkgmap-dev mailing list
> > > mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> > > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mkgmap-dev mailing list
> > mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
