yes I know - but even though both ways you linked have different turn restriction ID - the content of the turn restriction is identical (only straight on).
On 4 April 2018 at 10:54, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Hi Felix, > > yes, 1) would handle the case in my example. > Just to make sure: I meant turn restrictions, not route relations. > > Gerd > > ________________________________________ > Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-boun...@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von > Felix Hartmann <extremecar...@gmail.com> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 4. April 2018 10:48:20 > An: Development list for mkgmap > Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] overlapping highways and route restrictions > > For my maps 1) is enough - and warning not even needed. I think it's hard > to find out what the outcome should be. > The case of overlapping ways being part of different route relations on > the other hand I've seen quite often - in that case I think it's best to > just add all route relations to one way, and remove the other one. > > The example you found here - I think is quite possible to solve - both > restriction relations are identical - so one way including the restriction > relation can be removed, the route relations copied over. If the > restriction is having different rules - then however I don't think we can > solve it correctly (well an exception is if we have overlapping ways in OSM > which are oneway and opposite to each other - this is a rare case where > overlapping ways are not to be removed I guess). > > > > On 4 April 2018 at 10:39, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com > <mailto:gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com>> wrote: > Hi all, > > please help, I just try to make up my mind what mkgmap should do when it > finds overlapping road segments and > one (or both) of the overlaps is a part of a (valid) restriction > relation. This doesn't happen very often, but it is possible. > > The attached example contains these two overlapping ways, and both are > members of (different) restriction relations: > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218016 > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/48218008 > > (I did not try what the trunk version produces for this mess) > > I see different possibilities: > 1) ignore route restrictions when removing overlaps, remove those which > are invalid after overlapping segments were removed and log a warning > 2) ignore overlaps when the ways are members of restriction relations > 3) complex: remove overlaps but try to "repair" the restriction > > I am currently trying to implement 3) but it looks too complicated for > such a rare case and in the end we have a clear case of wrong input data > here. > What do you think? > > Gerd > > > _______________________________________________ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > email@example.com<mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org> > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev > > > > -- > Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org > Schusterbergweg 32/8 > 6020 Innsbruck > Austria - Österreich > _______________________________________________ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > email@example.com > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev > -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev