Hi all, if I got that right, mkgmap doesn't create usable maps without the --route option (index is not complete) On the other hand, StyledConverter doesn't evaluate the option, it just analyses if a line could be routable . A lot of routines are only executed for routable ways, e.g. the housenumber code. I think we should remove (ignore) the --route option, as it is mandantory. If possible, we should allow to create maps that don't contain a NOD section, I think this is wanted by some users. Gerd
El 22/04/14 07:32, Gerd Petermann escribió:
Hi all,
if I got that right, mkgmap doesn't create usable maps without the --route option (index is not complete) On the other hand, StyledConverter doesn't evaluate the option, it just analyses if a line could be routable . A lot of routines are only executed for routable ways, e.g. the housenumber code.
I think we should remove (ignore) the --route option, as it is mandantory. If possible, we should allow to create maps that don't contain a NOD section, I think this is wanted by some users.
Gerd +1. I think it's an obsolete option from the time that routable maps were something new for mkgmap. IMHO it should be the default now.
Hi Gerd, Garmin img consist of subfiles. There are some workable set of subfiles: basic map: TRE+RGN+LBL advanced: TRE+RGN+LBL+NET routable: TRE+RGN+LBL+NET+NOD IMO mkgmap should allow for creating any of these 3 types of maps. NOD subfile can be removed from img after creating, but I would prefer to have option for advanced map too. There is even obsolete option "net", which suggest this kind of map. As far as I know, you can't remove NET subfile from img. It won't be possible to get basic map without support for it in mkgmap. -- Best regards, Andrzej
The basic version could be usable for the old Etrex Legend with 8 Mb or Vista with 24 Mb storage space? On 22/04/2014 11:23, Andrzej Popowski wrote:
Hi Gerd,
Garmin img consist of subfiles. There are some workable set of subfiles:
basic map: TRE+RGN+LBL advanced: TRE+RGN+LBL+NET routable: TRE+RGN+LBL+NET+NOD
IMO mkgmap should allow for creating any of these 3 types of maps.
NOD subfile can be removed from img after creating, but I would prefer to have option for advanced map too. There is even obsolete option "net", which suggest this kind of map.
As far as I know, you can't remove NET subfile from img. It won't be possible to get basic map without support for it in mkgmap.
Lambertus schrieb (22/04/14 -- 11:30):
The basic version could be usable for the old Etrex Legend with 8 Mb or Vista with 24 Mb storage space?
And for the newer Etrex 10 as well. This device also cannot do any routing and has only about 8 Mb of free space. So yes, there is some use for images without NET and NOD. Currently, no-route creates this kind of basic map (depending on the configuration also with SRT, MPS and TYP subfiles). Viele Grüße, Axel.
Hi, basic map would be usable in situation, where small map size is more important than features. For example maps for fenix watches. Other applications could be basemap for wide area or maps for 3-rd party programs, which doesn't support advanced features, like for example Locus or OruxMaps for Android. -- Best regards, Andrzej
I agree with Andrzej - basic maps can become very popular in the near time. I can't talk about details but GPS market can be interesting at the end of the year ;). This is where we can beat any commercial map supplier with our OSM maps. Michal 2014-04-22 14:07 GMT+02:00 Andrzej Popowski <popej@poczta.onet.pl>:
Hi,
basic map would be usable in situation, where small map size is more important than features. For example maps for fenix watches.
Other applications could be basemap for wide area or maps for 3-rd party programs, which doesn't support advanced features, like for example Locus or OruxMaps for Android.
-- Best regards, Andrzej
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com> writes:
I think we should remove (ignore) the --route option, as it is mandantory. If possible, we should allow to create maps that don't contain a NOD section, I think this is wanted by some users.
I'm not sure what you mean. It sounds like having basic/advanced/routing is desireable from the list consensus. But I would suggest that routable maps be the default, when mkgmap is invoked without special arguments. Perhaps keep --net and --route, but allow --no-net and --no-route and make --net and --route default (and of course make route imply net)
Hi Greg,
I think we should remove (ignore) the --route option, as it is mandantory. If possible, we should allow to create maps that don't contain a NOD section, I think this is wanted by some users.
I'm not sure what you mean. It sounds like having basic/advanced/routing is desireable from the list consensus. But I would suggest that routable maps be the default, when mkgmap is invoked without special arguments. Perhaps keep --net and --route, but allow --no-net and --no-route and make --net and --route default (and of course make route imply net)
What I meant is this: The current implementation of mkgmap does more or less assume that --route is used. Many functions are not executed without that option, although they are not needed for routing, only for the creation of the NET data. For example, --housenumber has no effect without --route, but if I got that right you may want to be able to search for housenumbers without being able to route to them. NET data is not written without --route. In the current implementation it is not simple to write NET data without also writing NOD data. I agree that we should support NET without NOD. Gerd
participants (7)
-
Andrzej Popowski -
Axel Herold -
Carlos Dávila -
Gerd Petermann -
Greg Troxel -
Lambertus -
Michał Rogala