Should mkgmap report overly detailed ways?
Hi all, I don't know if their is a rule for mappers, but the typical way has not more than 2 nodes on a segment that is < 3m long. Some routines (e.g. the new WrongAngleFixer) in mkgmap have a lot of work with ways that are heavyly detailed. It would be quite easy to report them like this: Warning (POIGeneratorHook): e:\osm_out_work\ontario\20140302_095212\63240011.o5m: highly detailed way http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/100564006 has 362 nodes and is only ~ 77m long The question is: Would anybody use this info reduce the details in OSM? Gerd
On Wed, Mar 26, Gerd Petermann wrote:
The question is: Would anybody use this info reduce the details in OSM?
No, I don't think so. Especially as detailed informations make a difference in some editors. Thorsten -- Thorsten Kukuk, Senior Architect SLES & Common Code Base SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409 Nuernberg GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
Hi I tend to be a rather detailed OSM mapper. The practical issue is Garmins map's restrictions on defining points to around I think 2.5 metres means that I am less fussy now. Trouble with reporting is many roundabouts would be pulled up. As much as I use mkgmap there other applications that draw maps, and people like the pictures of roundabouts to look round. Therefore, I think mkgmap will have to deal with as best what the OSM community maps. Just my thoughts. Cheers From: gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 10:36:41 +0100 Subject: [mkgmap-dev] Should mkgmap report overly detailed ways? Hi all, I don't know if their is a rule for mappers, but the typical way has not more than 2 nodes on a segment that is < 3m long. Some routines (e.g. the new WrongAngleFixer) in mkgmap have a lot of work with ways that are heavyly detailed. It would be quite easy to report them like this: Warning (POIGeneratorHook): e:\osm_out_work\ontario\20140302_095212\63240011.o5m: highly detailed way http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/100564006 has 362 nodes and is only ~ 77m long The question is: Would anybody use this info reduce the details in OSM? Gerd _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hi, I agree that a roundabout should look round, and I don't want to solve mkgmap issues in OSM, I just don't understand the idea in situations like this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/100564006 362 nodes for a simple curve with 77m length? Gerd Brett Russell wrote
Hi I tend to be a rather detailed OSM mapper. The practical issue is Garmins map's restrictions on defining points to around I think 2.5 metres means that I am less fussy now. Trouble with reporting is many roundabouts would be pulled up. As much as I use mkgmap there other applications that draw maps, and people like the pictures of roundabouts to look round. Therefore, I think mkgmap will have to deal with as best what the OSM community maps. Just my thoughts. Cheers From:
gpetermann_muenchen@
To:
mkgmap-dev@.org
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 10:36:41 +0100 Subject: [mkgmap-dev] Should mkgmap report overly detailed ways?
Hi all,
I don't know if their is a rule for mappers, but the typical way has not more than 2 nodes on a segment that is < 3m long.
Some routines (e.g. the new WrongAngleFixer) in mkgmap have a lot of work with ways that are heavyly detailed.
It would be quite easy to report them like this: Warning (POIGeneratorHook): e:\osm_out_work\ontario\20140302_095212\63240011.o5m: highly detailed way http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/100564006 has 362 nodes and is only ~ 77m long
The question is: Would anybody use this info reduce the details in OSM?
Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
-- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Should-mkgmap-report-overly-detailed-ways-tp5... Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Wed, Mar 26, GerdP wrote:
Hi,
I agree that a roundabout should look round, and I don't want to solve mkgmap issues in OSM, I just don't understand the idea in situations like this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/100564006
362 nodes for a simple curve with 77m length?
That's an import: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/CanVec Thorsten -- Thorsten Kukuk, Senior Architect SLES & Common Code Base SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409 Nuernberg GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
Hi Thorsten, Thorsten Kukuk wrote
That's an import: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/CanVec
Ah, okay. I assumed that, but didn't have the idea to search for the source. Gerd -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Should-mkgmap-report-overly-detailed-ways-tp5... Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
participants (4)
-
Brett Russell -
Gerd Petermann -
GerdP
-
Thorsten Kukuk