<html><head><style id="outgoing-font-settings">#response_container_BBPPID{font-family: initial; font-size:initial; color: initial;}</style></head><body style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-image: initial; line-height: initial;"><div id="response_container_BBPPID" style="outline:none;" dir="auto" contenteditable="false"> <div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width:100%;"> Hi all,</div><div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width:100%;"><br></div><div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width:100%;">Just to jump in regarding routing.</div><div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width:100%;"><br></div><div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width:100%;">In countries such as Zambia a GPS would be used by overland travelers and much of the tourist POI's and interesting out of the way places in OSM have been mapped by these travelers. While a lot of the OSM data in Africa is not of good quality the parks and lodge data is of better quality than Google Maps. I would not trust Google Maps apart from within the centre of major cities, using it in the peripheries will send you down some strange routes and some locations are just plain wrong. South Africa is different, Google maps is very good there.</div><div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width:100%;"><br></div><div name="BB10" id="BB10_response_div_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width:100%;">Where Google maps is good in the centre of a heavily congested city like Lusaka is avoiding the traffic bottle necks as it uses phone location data to show slow routes and will route to avoid it quite effectively.</div> <div name="BB10" id="response_div_spacer_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width:100%;"> <br style="display:initial"></div><div name="BB10" id="response_div_spacer_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width:100%;">Just a different view point.</div><div name="BB10" id="response_div_spacer_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width:100%;"><br></div><div name="BB10" id="response_div_spacer_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width:100%;">Regards,</div><div name="BB10" id="response_div_spacer_BBPPID" dir="auto" style="width:100%;">Dave</div> <div id="blackberry_signature_BBPPID" name="BB10" dir="auto"> <div id="_signaturePlaceholder_BBPPID" name="BB10" dir="auto"></div> </div></div><div id="_original_msg_header_BBPPID" dir="auto"> <table width="100%" style="border-spacing: 0px; display: table; outline: none;" contenteditable="false"><tbody><tr><td colspan="2" style="padding: initial; font-size: initial; text-align: initial;"> <div style="border-right: none; border-bottom: none; border-left: none; border-image: initial; border-top: 1pt solid rgb(181, 196, 223); padding: 3pt 0in 0in; font-family: Tahoma, "BB Alpha Sans", "Slate Pro"; font-size: 10pt;"> <div id="from"><b>From:</b> extremecarver@gmail.com</div><div id="sent"><b>Sent:</b> 5 May 2021 10:17</div><div id="to"><b>To:</b> mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk</div><div id="reply_to"><b>Reply to:</b> mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk</div><div id="subject"><b>Subject:</b> Re: [mkgmap-dev] new branch low-res-opt to test improvements for filters</div></div></td></tr></tbody></table> <br> </div><!--start of _originalContent --><div name="BB10" dir="auto" style="background-image: initial; line-height: initial; outline: none;" contenteditable="false"><div dir="ltr"><div>Hi Karl,</div>But even then you will never use the overview map. <div><br></div><div>What resolution are you actually using on your device if routing on a highway? I guess 19 or 20... </div><div>The thing is simply with high DP filter value that you can see the highway pretty straight, but as the route itself is not simplifed that much in Basecamp. The route will not be 1:1 visually of the map. But still very easy to see the the underlying highway. if you plan a route from Berlin to Mardrid, then zoom out and see the whole route - then it's not so beautiful anymore. But can any mkgmap created map actually route from Berlin to Madrid without via points? It's a long time that I looked at mgkmap created maps for car routing and some years ago this was not possible.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 15:48, 7770 <<a href="mailto:7770@foskan.eu">7770@foskan.eu</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb( 204 , 204 , 204 );padding-left:1ex">Hi.<br>
Sorry for getting into the discussion.<br>
Routing over long distances is important, also via highways.<br>
There can be multiple nearby exists along the way that one does not know by <br>
heart and does not want to miss.<br>
Quite often one (at least i) does not want to fiddle around with device while <br>
driving, instead simply start the route in the beginning even if a large <br>
portion of the travel is fairly known. <br>
<br>
Regards<br>
Karl<br>
<br>
<br>
On onsdag 5 maj 2021 kl. 09:32:52 CEST Felix Hartmann wrote:<br>
> Really, routing over long distances on highways? I haven"t met people using<br>
> a Garmin GPS device routing via highways - however many who use it for<br>
> recreational purposes - so routing over short distances.<br>
> <br>
> Anyhow if you use a lower DP value no problem there. It's mainly if you<br>
> zoom out to overview map resolution at 18, 17 or wherever that starts. So<br>
> far mkgmap maps were unusable on devices for 17 or lower due to being very<br>
> slow. I'm not sure how much of this was too much data in those tiles, and<br>
> how much that the device has to look up too many tiles. That's what the<br>
> device is using the basemap for, and Basecamp using the overview map for.<br>
> So if you zoom out that far - no problems if the route doesn't fully follow<br>
> the underlying map. It's the same for Garmin city navigator maps.<br>
> <br>
> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 15:27, Thomas Morgenstern <<a href="mailto:webmaster@img2ms.de">webmaster@img2ms.de</a>> wrote:<br>
> > Hi all, I see this completly different : many people use osm data for<br>
> > routing. Routing is the main purpose for using OSM. If routing [<br>
> > *quote]<br>
> > <br>
> > : ** it will look a bit strange [end quote] *is not akzeptable.<br>
> > <br>
> > Thomas<br>
> > <br>
> > <br>
> > Quote :.............<br>
> > So yes with very high DP values and lots of simplification if you plan a<br>
> > car route over highways, at some point it will look a bit strange. But<br>
> > again, very few people use Garmin maps for car routing nowadays, and even<br>
> > less car routing based on OSM data. ......<br>
> > <br>
> > On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 14:29, Gerd Petermann <<br>
> > <a href="mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com">gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> > Hi Felix,<br>
> > <br>
> > I don't think that it only depends on the typ file. Programs like<br>
> > GpsMapEdit also show wrong merges.<br>
> > <br>
> > Reg. roads: Seems RoadMerger also doesn't reverse points, I didn't notice<br>
> > that before. So, I have two methods to improve.<br>
> > It's quite difficult to understand the effects because we<br>
> > - merge roads with equal attributes<br>
> > - possibly split those roads again to avoid loops or too long roads or too<br>
> > complex roads (too many connections) or other limits in IMG format (this<br>
> > is<br>
> > needed for routable maps, maybe not for others)<br>
> > - possibly merge again at levels > 0<br>
> > <br>
> > I have to think about this again. Maybe there is no problem with the NET<br>
> > file changes when this last step is done. The NET file contains "pointers"<br>
> > to the RGN file for each level in which the road is rendered. So, if a<br>
> > road<br>
> > is rendered at level 1 the data in NET allows to show all the road labels.<br>
> > Maybe that's all and there is no further effect (esp. not on routing), but<br>
> > maybe the info is also used when you create route in Basecamp. I guess<br>
> > it's<br>
> > not.<br>
> > I have no idea what Garmin software does when a road has pointers to lines<br>
> > at levels 0, 1, and 3 but not at level 2. I found no such case in Garmin<br>
> > demo maps. I think that could happen when I don't add code to prevent it.<br>
> > Probably it doesn't matter much when RoadMerger is allowed to reverse so<br>
> > that we have fewer parts which could be merged later.<br>
> > <br>
> > Gerd<br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > mkgmap-dev mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk">mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk</a><br>
> > <a href="https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev">https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
mkgmap-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk">mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk</a><br>
<a href="https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev">https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div>Felix Hartman - <wbr><a href="http://Openmtbmap.org">Openmtbmap.org</a><wbr> & <wbr><a href="http://VeloMap.org">VeloMap.org</a><wbr><br></div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div>
<!--end of _originalContent --></div></body></html>