[mkgmap-dev] Sea generationFrom Marko Mäkelä marko.makela at iki.fi on Fri Nov 5 07:19:34 GMT 2010
On Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 11:04:24PM +0100, WanMil wrote: >Some loud thinking: >Would it be helpful if we copy the Mapnik behaviour of well defined >coastlines? One could define one separate file that contains all >coastline data (from europe, from the world?). This file could be >maintained and improved in a better way than it is done in the OSM >data. natural=coastline would be ignored/removed from the OSM input. Good idea. This may lead to some duplicate lines, in case some natural=coastline double as administrative borders or something like that, but I am fairly sure that those cases can be sorted out. >As a second step the separate coastline file would build a basis and >the data from the OSM could be compared to this. Differences in the OSM >files are only accepted if they don't invert the sea polygons and if >they don't build new gaps. What if the coastline file were based on the database? All fixes to the coastline file would be backported to the database, and the coastline file would be re-cloned, fixed and merged back every month or so. Actually, we could generate a separate set of 'coastline' .img tiles that would be under the map data. Should there be a simple tool for merging map layer .img files for end users? I am thinking that many would be happy updating their sea layer only once per year or so, cutting the download volume? The same could apply to contour layers, which might not even be distributable when merged with OSM-derived data. >I haven't checked the mp warnings for long but I think most of the >warnings are "real" warnings now. With one exception: The conversion >from float to int coordinates sometimes causes some polygons to overlap >which don't overlap in the original OSM data. Could the overlap check be performed in the float domain as well? If there is an overlap only in the int domain, then issue a 'loss of precision' warning? That should get rid of the bogus intersection errors that I see for these hyper-precision micro-mapped multipolygons: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/405246 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/934321 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1068062 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1225936 http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/1232121 I haven't checked how these multipolygons look like on the map. In these cases, it might be OK to discard the offending polygon or the entire multipolygon, but what if someone starts micro-mapping boulders that are submerged in the beach water? Would it be always OK to discard the polygon that is overlapping or intersecting with the lines of other multipolygon members? Best regards, Marko PS: I am just updating http://www.polkupyoraily.net/osm/.
- Previous message: [mkgmap-dev] Sea generation
- Next message: [mkgmap-dev] Bogus multipolygon warnings outside tile boundary
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the mkgmap-dev mailing list