> Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 12:15:42 +0100
> From: wmgcnfg@web.de
> To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] additional arcs patch
>
> I have compared results from the branch and the trunk.
>
> I have to revert my suspicion: distances are equal.
>
> I see some differences in routing so that it seems that larger roads are
> much more prefered in trunk than in branch. I'll have to check if that's
> good or bad :-)
>
> WanMil
>
> > Ignore the Google result.
> >
> > I am quite sure that there is a difference between the high-prec-coords
> > branch and the trunk. I need to recompile the map with the trunk to
> > confirm this.
> >
> > WanMil
> >
> >> Please, forgive my 2 cents on this:
> >>
> >> Depending on which projection each system is using, distance calculation
> >> may (and usually) differ by that much and maybe more. As far as I know,
> >> Google uses a Mercator-like projection on a spherical Earth model, which
> >> is not correct since Google coordinates refer to the WGS-84 ellipsoid.
> >> So you can expect differences, greater with higher latitudes.
> >>
> >> So don't use Google as an accurate reference.
> >>
> >> all the best,
> >>
> >> Paulo
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-02-20 17:23 GMT-03:00 WanMil <wmgcnfg@web.de
> >> <mailto:wmgcnfg@web.de>>:
> >>
> >> Hi Gerd,
> >>
> >> which difference do you expect regarding the indirect links? I want
> >> to get an idea what I should check on my device.
> >>
> >> I have compiled a map using the patch and it seems that distances
> >> are slightly underestimated.
> >> One example: The distance between Hambug, An der Alster and Munich,
> >> Maximiliansplatz:
> >> MapSource: 776km
> >> Google Maps: 788km
> >> Both use the same route.
> >>
> >> I didn't notice it before.
> >>
> >> WanMil
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> attached is a patch for r3065 in the high-prec-coord branch.
> >>
> >> It should improve long distance routing, as it adds additional
> >> arcs from minor roads to major roads (so called indirect links).
> >> Maybe the improvement is only seen on the device.
> >>
> >> It would be great to hear some test results (good or bad),
> >> compared to trunk r3057 and compared to r3065.
> >>
> >> A compiled binary is here:
> >> |http://files.mkgmap.org.uk/__download/179/mkgmap.jar
> >> <http://files.mkgmap.org.uk/download/179/mkgmap.jar>
> >>
> >> |Gerd
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _________________________________________________
> >> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> >> mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> >> <mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>
> >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/__mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> >> <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev>
> >>
> >>
> >> _________________________________________________
> >> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> >> mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> >> <mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk>
> >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/__mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> >> <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> >> mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > mkgmap-dev mailing list
> > mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev