-dev/2016q3/025104.html
Gerd
Von: mkgmap-dev im Auftrag von Greg
Troxel
Gesendet: Dienstag, 21. Januar 2020 17:26
An: Ticker Berkin
Cc: Development list for mkgmap
Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] change handling of railway=abandoned
I think part of the problem
I think part of the problem is that railway=abandonded is not a
statement either way about
whether it is reasonably physically traversable on foot
whether there is any right of access
so I guess I don't see why a way with railway=abandonded and no highway
tags should be presumed routable in
Just for the sake of argument: I don't like [access=no].
It's suggesting [access=no] is "default" access (which it's not).
Next step is to add the Exceptions: [bicycle=yes], [foot=yes].
Double denial, Conflicting information, Contradictio in terminis.
Also wondering: when is [access=no] - ever -
Hi Ticker,
you are right, that's a good point.
Gerd
Von: mkgmap-dev im Auftrag von Ticker
Berkin
Gesendet: Dienstag, 21. Januar 2020 13:18
An: Development list for mkgmap
Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] change handling of railway=abandoned
Hi
gt; disabled the mop up rule for highway=*
>
> Gerd
>
>
> Von: mkgmap-dev im Auftrag
> von Ticker Berkin
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 21. Januar 2020 12:03
> An: Development list for mkgmap
> Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] change handling of railway=aban
pment list for mkgmap
Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] change handling of railway=abandoned
Hi
Gerd rule should be OK with the addition clause of & highway!=*, but is
there any reason not to have what I suggested.
Ticker
On Tue, 2020-01-21 at 11:36 +0100, Bernhard Hiller wrote:
> Hi Gerd,
> of co
if a tag like foot=yes or bicycle=yes
> > exists.
> > Tickers idea should have more or less the same effect.
> >
> > Gerd
> >
> >
> > Von: Bernhard Hiller
> > Gesendet: Montag, 20. Januar 2020 19:41
hout highway=* still might be used
as a highway if a tag like foot=yes or bicycle=yes exists.
Tickers idea should have more or less the same effect.
Gerd
Von: Bernhard Hiller
Gesendet: Montag, 20. Januar 2020 19:41
An: Gerd Petermann
Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-
Hi Gerd,
"add access=no" is a very dangerous option.
In my style, I added a rule for removing such ways completely. And it
failed terribly - today, there may be public roads on previous railways.
See also my post in the forum at
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=66451
Kind regards,
Hi
I have this in my style:
railway=abandoned & highway!=* &
((bicycle=* & bicycle!=no & bicycle!=proposed) |
(foot=* & foot!=no & foot!=proposed))
{set highway=path}
highway=path might be converted by later rules to bridleway, footway or
cycleway
Ticker
On Sat, 2020-01-18 at 18:51
Hi all,
the default style has this rule:
# following really should be removed, but see:
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/2016q3/025104.html
railway=abandoned [0x0a road_class=0 road_speed=1 resolution 22]
I agree with Ticker that it is not a good idea to make such a way routable.
11 matches
Mail list logo
