Worldwide routable Garmin maps: Missing/incorrect feature requests

I’m afraid you can’t reliably draw oneway arrows, some nuvis don’t follow line direction when drawing line pattern. And this was probably a feature designed for car navigation. As far as I know, this should work in Mapsource/BaseCamp and outdoor GPS.

Oneway arrows work on the nüvi 2xx/3xx but I havent tested it on newer models. What doesnt work very well is symbols on left or right side, like cycleway:right=lane or cycleway:left=lane.
This is drawn on the opposite side on gps models compared with Basecamp and Mapsource.

I can see problems on nuvi 2340 and nuvi 1440, probably both generations can behave this way. Nuvi 34xx seems to work ok. But my maps are different, lines aren’t roads and pattern asymmetry is in different direction. I would have to download your maps and check.

Edit: older nuvi are much more free maps friendly. Quality of map look degraded badly in new models, you simply can’t expect that map will look like in Mapsource. POI are missing, street line width depends on nuvi theme, area patterns don’t work correctly in series 1xxx. Garmin is probably not interested in maintaining compatibility with older maps.

Edit: direction of arrows is ok, only these nuvi swap at random position of arrows from right to left.

Ok, im glad to hear that. The position left or right depends on the unit and is a Garmin bug. I reported it to Garmin but they havent done anything, seems they dont care. :confused:

Committed some changes in the polygons style file:
Added: boundary = national_park/nature_reserve/protected_area, landuse=grass
Removed: man_made=groyne/reinforced_slope
Adjusted some zoomlevels

Overall, I’m really liking the new style, but one issue I noticed when using it while hiking yesterday is that on my Montana, the brown dotted lines for hiking trails are nearly invisible atop a green background (as is used on national forest boundaries in the U.S.), and completely impossible to see when hill shading is also present. Is it possible to have a white outline around the brown, so it has better contrast over dark backgrounds?

Thanks for that feedback. Outlines probably won’t work very well, but I think we should look at using a different colour that contrasts the green better. Perhaps if it was a darker brown?

I don’t see why outlines won’t work, they would be better visible in the forests, thanks for your suggestion.
Can you try this type file: http://mkgmap-style-sheets.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/typ/world-test/2000.typ

If the link to the typ file was directed to me, using it (I changed it with JaVaWa GMTK) doesn’t seem to make a noticeable difference for hiking trails (highway=path and highway=footway both), at least within BaseCamp:

I’m also including how the trails used to look (and look still with no typ file) just for comparison—the white in between the brown seems a big factor in making them visible:

Note that the new ones are a lot more visible in the BaseCamp screenshot than they were on the actual device. The hill shading on the device undoubtedly has a lot to do with that, but also perhaps screen glare, etc.

jonathan, maybe you have to clear the cache first to see the new typ file (2x ctrl-G), Basecamp probably used the old layout from the cache.
Hill shading makes the device unreadable, I always turn it off.

This is how it should look, you can edit the typ file with a typ file editor, the Garmin type for path is line 0x16

Any chance that ski lifts be included in the maps?

Good question, on the Openfietsmap a few are already rendered, so yes that wouldnt be too difficult:
aerialway=cable_car
aerialway=gondola

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ski_Lift

Let me know which other types are important too?

Thanks. I think the consideration here is for Garmin equipped recreational skiers and that all ski lifts should be included ie. From magic carpet to gondola. As a minimum, maybe not magic carpets but T-bar and above. This would make unfamiliar ski resorts that much easier to navigate. :sunglasses:

I think it make sense to render aerialway = cable_car, gondola, chair_lift, mixed_lift, but I doubt if we should render T-bars and drag lifts etc, for this you better use a specific osm ski map?

Ski lifts usually are placed in an area, that doesn’t contain many map objects. You don’t risk to make map overloaded even including all of them.

Hi,

I am using your maps (tdb version) with TTQV4 Software. With the new style there is an ugly brown diagonal hatch in the background all over the map. With the old style the background is white (as it should be) and only urban areas are shown as brown hatch. I tested this with Denmark and a while ago with Romania. Unfortunately TTQV4 cannot use TYP files. Do you see any chance to remove the brown hatch and getting a white backgrund with the new style?

thanks
Wolfgang

Thanks Wolfgang, I’ll see what I can do. The reason for choosing a different background was that the default background showed “ghost shading” when zooming in/out, but I think this issue has been solved already.

We have a routing problem. A couple of days ago my GPS tried to send me through a bike track.

The original is a highway=footway, with bicycle and m/c=yes. In the Garmin map that becomes “Unknown type” 0x10 with routing restrictions for everything but peds, bikes and CARS.

If this map was compiled for motorcycles then that would be correct, but for a car map it is not. Having said that, as far as I know the car restriction doesn’t work anyway. This will probably have to be compiled into a walkway (0x16).

Why is this tagged as footway? Imho the tagging as footway is wrong since cylists and even motorbikes are allowed so better use another highway type with motorcar =no. I dont think garmin types have anything to do with routing, its the road attributes and access tags that impact the routing.

It’s a rough dirt track that connects the two lanes of a dual carriageway. You find them everywhere in Thailand. Anything that fits through will use it. I didn’t really know how to tag it, being such an “ad-hoc” feature. I guess cycleway would be better. On a bike it saves you from riding several km up the road to do a U-turn. (The locals will also quite happily ride/drive down the wrong side. Seen a big concrete truck doing it today.)

You can see it nicely on Google Streetview. It’s at 14.874111, 100.086608.

The routing restriction for cars in Garmin maps doesn’t work, so everything tagged with motorcar=no needs to be rendered in the Garmin map as footpath.

Kind regards,
Peter.