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 Gerd
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
|Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
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>:
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
|Gerd
_______________________________________________ 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
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
Hi WanMil, one difference to trunk is the formula that is used to convert meters to length in MapUnits. I've changed it to the value that Steve found with the display tool. The effect is that MapSource + BC show a different travel time for exactly the same route while it shows the same road length. I expect only changes when using "faster time", and probably only car routing is effected. Gerd WanMil wrote
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@
<mailto:
wmgcnfg@
>>:
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@.org
<mailto:
mkgmap-dev@.org
>
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/__mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev>;
_________________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
<mailto:
mkgmap-dev@.org
>
http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/__mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev>;
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
-- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/additional-arcs-patch-tp5796915p5796957.html Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
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
Hi WanMil, thanks for testing. Today I found one more rule in Garmin maps that we ignore when writing NOD data. I have no idea yet if that is important or how to implement the rule. Gerd
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
Hi WanMil, the indirect links should help the device to find a route with many nodes. I'd expect either longer possible routes or faster calculation, but I didn't notice them on my Oregon. Maybe it helps only on devices with small memory capacities. Gerd WanMil wrote
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
|Gerd
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@.org
-- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/additional-arcs-patch-tp5796915p5796950.html Sent from the Mkgmap Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi, On Thu, Feb 20, Gerd Petermann wrote:
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.
I made some comparisations over the weekend with that patch with my 62s (terrible to look at the route, but MapSource always failed to create a route at all over this distance): Fastest route: Trunk: 444km, 03:53 Branch: 434km, 03:47 Shortest route: Trunk: 433km, 04:18 Branch: 422km, 04:15 The route is in both cases identical. Google has 458 km, 4:019, but uses a different route, so not compareable. While the 62s route is the best one on the paper, the google route is better in reality. I had also the impression that the trunk is faster in calculating the route then the branch, but forgot to stop the time. 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, my findings are different, but the overall result was that the patch doesn't improve routing at this stage. We have a known error (or call it difference) in the calculation of an important value that identifies good routes, so the patch probably just adds more wrong information in several cases. Investigating... Gerd
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 13:00:02 +0100 From: kukuk@suse.de To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] additional arcs patch
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 20, Gerd Petermann wrote:
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.
I made some comparisations over the weekend with that patch with my 62s (terrible to look at the route, but MapSource always failed to create a route at all over this distance): Fastest route: Trunk: 444km, 03:53 Branch: 434km, 03:47
Shortest route: Trunk: 433km, 04:18 Branch: 422km, 04:15
The route is in both cases identical. Google has 458 km, 4:019, but uses a different route, so not compareable. While the 62s route is the best one on the paper, the google route is better in reality.
I had also the impression that the trunk is faster in calculating the route then the branch, but forgot to stop the time.
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) _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
On Mon, Feb 24, Gerd Petermann wrote:
Hi Thorsten,
my findings are different, but the overall result was that the patch doesn't improve routing at this stage.
It improves at least on the 62s long distance routing: while with trunk I'm not able to route to a destination over 600km as the crow flies, with the trunk version it's no problem and pretty fast. Between, with mapsource, the distance where it works for me is somewhere between 300-350 km, independent on the mkgmap version. Thorsten
We have a known error (or call it difference) in the calculation of an important value that identifies good routes, so the patch probably just adds more wrong information in several cases. Investigating...
Gerd
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 13:00:02 +0100 From: kukuk@suse.de To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] additional arcs patch
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 20, Gerd Petermann wrote:
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.
I made some comparisations over the weekend with that patch with my 62s (terrible to look at the route, but MapSource always failed to create a route at all over this distance): Fastest route: Trunk: 444km, 03:53 Branch: 434km, 03:47
Shortest route: Trunk: 433km, 04:18 Branch: 422km, 04:15
The route is in both cases identical. Google has 458 km, 4:019, but uses a different route, so not compareable. While the 62s route is the best one on the paper, the google route is better in reality.
I had also the impression that the trunk is faster in calculating the route then the branch, but forgot to stop the time.
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) _______________________________________________ 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
-- 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)
On Mon, Feb 24, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, Gerd Petermann wrote:
I made some comparisations over the weekend with that patch with my 62s (terrible to look at the route, but MapSource always failed to create a route at all over this distance): Fastest route: Trunk: 444km, 03:53 Branch: 434km, 03:47
Shortest route: Trunk: 433km, 04:18 Branch: 422km, 04:15
I made a mistake, I switched Trunk and Branch ... The longer distance is r3065 from high-prec-coord branch with the patch. Sorry, 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 Gerd, I have done some comparison between trunk r3057 and high-precision r3065. Routing is very similar. I have found some examples, where calculated route was a bit different, but both versions have looked correct. I have found one example, where BaseCamp hasn't been able to calculate short route for r3057 but the same route has been calculated correctly with r3065. For above tests I have used map of Poland, some longer routes across whole country and some routes inside a city. I have done another test with map of Europe and r3065 only. BaseCamp can successfully calculate very long routes, like for example Viena-Madrid, Hamburg-Naples or Murmansk-Sofia. I can't say, if this is due to recent changes, but this is very distinct progress since the last time I have tested it. My congratulations to all developers. -- Best regards, Andrzej
Hi Andrzej, thanks again for testing. I am pretty sure that the patch has an influence on routing, but the results are probably not always better. I found a few errors in it until now and I am working on an improved version. Gerd
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 21:46:15 +0100 From: popej@poczta.onet.pl To: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] additional arcs patch
Hi Gerd,
I have done some comparison between trunk r3057 and high-precision r3065. Routing is very similar. I have found some examples, where calculated route was a bit different, but both versions have looked correct.
I have found one example, where BaseCamp hasn't been able to calculate short route for r3057 but the same route has been calculated correctly with r3065.
For above tests I have used map of Poland, some longer routes across whole country and some routes inside a city.
I have done another test with map of Europe and r3065 only. BaseCamp can successfully calculate very long routes, like for example Viena-Madrid, Hamburg-Naples or Murmansk-Sofia. I can't say, if this is due to recent changes, but this is very distinct progress since the last time I have tested it. My congratulations to all developers.
-- Best regards, Andrzej _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
Hi Gerd, I have tested long distance routing with mkgmap-sort-r3067 too. BaseCamp can create long routes, but they aren't the same as in high precision branch. Similarly like in previous comparisons, I can't tell which results are better. I really appreciate smaller size of img created with high precision branch, but unfortunately I can't use it, because of search problems connected with transliteration. These problems are solved in mkgmap-sort-r3067 or at least I can find addresses in Bulgaria. Could you merge both branches? -- Best regards, Andrzej
On 02/03/14 23:11, Andrzej Popowski wrote:
I really appreciate smaller size of img created with high precision branch, but unfortunately I can't use it, because of search problems connected with transliteration. These problems are solved in mkgmap-sort-r3067 or at least I can find addresses in Bulgaria. Could you merge both branches?
I am going to merge the current sort branch back to trunk before starting on the larger changes to support unicode. ..Steve
participants (7)
-
Andrzej Popowski -
Gerd Petermann -
GerdP
-
Paulo Carvalho -
Steve Ratcliffe -
Thorsten Kukuk -
WanMil