On 12.02.2010 19:26, WanMil wrote:
Hello
On 12/02/10 10:24, Minko wrote:
Simplification looks like this, where the two vertical border lines are not supposed to be there: http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/1002/bordersnl5.jpg
Thanks for that image as it shows the problem clearly.
If the boundaries were being drawn as areas, then the lines would not be seen (or not much anyway) since they would be zero width. However since the borders are drawn as lines you clearly see the connecting lines.
I think that the best way to solve this is for mkgmap to convert to multipolygon into separate lines in the case of boundaries.
..Steve
Steve,
I have two solutions:
1st: We might add a mkgmap option to disable multipolygon processing for boundaries.
2nd: the multipolygon code should not remove the boundary tags from the singular ways. Additionally the polygons created by the multipolygon code could be tagged with mkgmap:mp_boundary=yes. This tag could be evaluated in the style definition so the style could differ between the polygons created by the mp code and the lines not touched by mp code.
I think the 2nd solution looks cleaner (or less easy to find out why something goes wrong). I just gripe about tags being lost. I think it should rather be converted to: mkgmap:mp_boundary=${boundary} mkgmap:mp_admin-level=${admin-level} in order not to loose the importance. As I'm not well informed about naming of boundaries, care should be taken not to loose the keys depicting the info how to name a boundary too.
What do you think? (I am not an expert of the style processing)
WanMil _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev