Depends what someone calls paved and what unpaved. That really makes a difference in what country you are. Guess the situation in Thailand is very different than Europe. For my OFM I consider tracks with grade1 or surface=asphalt as paved (same rendering as paved unclassified). Is that what you have in mind?
I have found that
highway=track
surface=paved
is rendered as an unpaved road and when you put the mouse pointer over it it says: “unpaved road”.
In Thailand most small roads and residential streets have a concrete surface.
You are absolutely right Peter. Looking at the generic new styles, the rule that is causing this issue is this one:
(highway=bridleway | highway=path | highway=track | highway=unsurfaced)
& surface!=* & tracktype!=* & smoothness!=* & sac_scale!=*
{ add mkgmap:unpaved=1 }
If my interpretation is correct, it says that all those types of highway are considered as unpaved, unless there is a surface, tracktype, smoothness AND sac_scale parameter! This rule makes no sense at all so must be corrected. The mkgmap default rule is the same so I will discuss this on the mkgmap-dev list first.
In the default style the rule is preceded by this one:
highway=*
& (surface=cobblestone | surface=compacted | surface=dirt |
surface=earth | surface=grass | surface=grass_paver |
surface=gravel | surface=grit | surface=ground | surface=mud |
surface=pebblestone | surface=sand | surface=unpaved |
mtb:scale=* |
tracktype ~ 'grade[2-6]' |
smoothness ~ '.*(bad|horrible|impassable)' |
sac_scale ~ '.*(mountain|alpine)_hiking' |
sport=via_ferrata)
{ add mkgmap:unpaved=1 }
So I think the rule is not that wrong.
I dont understand it Gerd. What does “&” mean then? To me it says make highway=track unpaved if surface AND tracktype AND smoothness AND sac_scale are not empty. Otherwise I cant explain why surface=paved is set unpaved by mkgmap?
I also understand the rule like that.
It should not set mkgmap:unpaved=1 for a way with highway=track and surface=paved
I did not yet try it. If it does I’d say something is wrong in mkgmap.
Now I’ve tested it, and it worked ok. Even with avoidance. The only thing that is not correct is the generic new typ file, it still says unpaved because that is the label if there is no streetname. I can try to correct it by adding a second label.
But still, the syntax is a bit strange: & surface!=* & tracktype!=* & smoothness!=* & sac_scale!=*
Unpaved will not be applied if one of those values is not empty, and I read it as ALL of above values must be not empty.
And then it is still not correct. Say someone tagged the track with surface=soil (1014 values in OSM, but not specified as unpaved by mkgmap). It is better specify a rule like
highway=track & surface! ~ '.*(paved|asphalt|sett|concrete|paving_stones|metal|wood)' { add mkgmap:unpaved=1 }
And what about cobblestone? Paved or unpaved?
I’d rather add the surface=soil part to the preceding rule.
Agree, we cannot catch all types that people have entered.
Actually condition like surface!=* means opposite: highway is unpaved if surface IS EMPTY and tracktype IS EMPTY and …
My fault, yes you are right, if all those parameters don’t exists its unpaved. The preceding rule has to catch all unpaved and if surface=something else mkgmap assumes it is paved. I only need to add label=paved to this rule, but I better prefer a rule like surface=paved etc {addlabel ‘paved’} rather then “if those parameters are not empty” then assume its paved and add a label paved to it
I have decided to change only the label in the typ file. Adding a label ‘paved’ will show up as streetname if there is no name. I cannot make it invisible unless I use or add another line type, but since routable line types are all taken and I don’t want a second line on top of another it’s better to leave it behind.
So, paved tracks will now have a mouse-over label “paved”, but continue to appear as unpaved roads, incl. routing avoidance?
No routing will not be avoided anymore, appearance will be the same, I don’t think it must be rendered the same as unclassified roads otherwise why dont people tag it like that?
Ok, all good. Thanks for all your good work.
Actually, I am having a hard time sometimes deciding whether a particular road in Thailand is a paved track, residential or unclassified. In the end, all I can do is look at the aerial images to see whether there are a few houses on the road and whether it connects villages or just heads into the rice paddies. As I said, it is a continuum. If in doubt it is residential.
Hi, firstly, thanks for your work.
I have an old Edge 705 GPS unit. Is it possible to have a TYP option where the borders of the road sections are not drawn? On a 705 this leads to the “spaghetti problem” as seen on http://www.cferrero.net/maps/screenshots_index.html. Thanks a lot in advance.
Hi Zeb,
You can edit the typ file with an editor like typviewer. If you use a bicycle map try my openfietsmap, it is designed to prevent those issues as much as possible.
I already use CFerrero TYP files with my own mkgmap scripts. But it would be great to have a similar one on http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl/ if possible?
Do you mean you already have such typ file and want to give it to the community? You can try to mail Lambertus if he is willing implement it in his compilation chain.
Well, it is based on the work from CFerrero originally, which I modified. CFerrero has not updated his site for years, and removing contour from road lines does probably fall outside copyright, so it should be ok to share. I am happy to provide the files to Lambertus. I will contact him.