[mkgmap-dev] [PATCH v1] Destination completion

2012-11-02 Thread WanMil
Hi, attached is a patch that implements the proposed completion of the destination tag. It can be enabled with the --enable-destination-completion The code logs which ways are additionally tagged with destionation and which are skipped: uk.me.parabola.mkgmap.reader.osm.LinkDestinationHook.l

Re: [mkgmap-dev] [PATCH v1] Destination completion

2012-11-02 Thread Chris66
Hi, thank you, will test it. Is your algorithm able to fill gaps? Example: 1) motorway_link destination=a_city 2) motorway_link 3) motorway Would the current implementation copy the dest from 1) to 3) ? Chris Am 02.11.2012 16:03, schrieb WanMil: > Hi, > > attached is a patch that impl

Re: [mkgmap-dev] [PATCH v1] Destination completion

2012-11-02 Thread WanMil
> Hi, > thank you, will test it. > > Is your algorithm able to fill gaps? > > Example: > > 1) motorway_link destination=a_city > 2) motorway_link > 3) motorway > > Would the current implementation copy the dest from 1) to 3) ? Yes - as long as the motorway_link 2) and motorway 3) do not hav

Re: [mkgmap-dev] [PATCH v1] Destination completion

2012-11-04 Thread Chris66
Am 02.11.2012 21:01, schrieb WanMil: >> Would the current implementation copy the dest from 1) to 3) ? > > Yes - as long as the motorway_link 2) and motorway 3) do not have other > connections afterwards. Hi WanMil, So the algorithm also seems to forward the destination from one motorway-segme

Re: [mkgmap-dev] [PATCH v1] Destination completion

2012-11-04 Thread WanMil
> Am 02.11.2012 21:01, schrieb WanMil: > >>> Would the current implementation copy the dest from 1) to 3) ? >> >> Yes - as long as the motorway_link 2) and motorway 3) do not have other >> connections afterwards. > > Hi WanMil, > > So the algorithm also seems to forward the destination from one > m

Re: [mkgmap-dev] [PATCH v1] Destination completion

2012-11-04 Thread Chris66
Am 04.11.2012 17:54, schrieb WanMil: >> So the algorithm also seems to forward the destination from one >> motorway-segment to the next one. Don't think this is needed. > > Did you observe that? The patch should not do that. The forwarding stops > after the first non *_link segment. Just notice