Re: [mkgmap-dev] boundary relations in splitter

Hi Minko, Minko-2 wrote

Why is option 1 too simple? Most important is that it is effective and customizable. I would go for 1a, add an include list and I can add my own options, like national_park and protected_area.

Maybe a good idea to exclude mp boundaries too.

Just to make sure: with hard coded I meant hard coded in java source, so you can't customize it without changing the source and compile the changes. Gerd -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/boundary-relations-in-splitter-tp5749069p5749... Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.