[mkgmap-dev] Duplicate cities

Thu May 21 17:25:12 BST 2015

Could the admin_levels be made configurable in some way? There are
considerable differences in the size of these areas between different
countries. I am thinking particularly of the lower admin_level (5) which
might be better set to 6 (or even 8) in the UK. Level 5 corresponds to
"regions" which are basically only for statistics and some government
stuff - not many people would know what region they are in (except they
could probably guess because they are called things like "South East
England"). Level 6 corresponds to Counties, and everyone uses them. 

//colin 

On 2015-05-21 17:00, Gerd Petermann wrote: 

> Hi Andrzej,
> 
> I tried using --boundary-tags=administrative 
> for splitter, the amount of additional data depends
> on the size of the largest boundaries.
> 
> Attached is a small patch that changes splitter so
> that it keeps administrative boundaries complete
> when the admin_level is between 5 and 11 (including).
> 
> This doesn't add much data to the output files
> in comparison to --boundary-tags=administrative 
> when splitting e.g. Brazil with --max-nodes=800000
> and --output=o5m:
> a) r422 output size: ~ 359 M 
> b) patched version : ~381 M 
> c) unpatched r422 with --boundary-tags=administrative: 402 M
> 
> I've also tested the effect on mkgmap.
> As expected, version a) produces some wrong / duplicate POI,
> but I don't see them for b) or c).
> The throughput is nearly identical, and the final img size is also almost equal.
> 
> So, I think the patch is the best compromise.
> 
> Gerd
> 
>> Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 12:56:43 +0200
>> From: popej at poczta.onet.pl
>> To: mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
>> Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Duplicate cities
>> 
>> Hi Gerd,
>> 
>>> Hmm, splitter keeps most mp-relations complete, we only
>>> exclude some boundary relations.
>> 
>> I see. But maybe potential increase wouldn't be that big, if you add 
>> boundaries?
>> 
>> Or maybe you can preserve only some levels of boundaries?
>> 
>> Or you can use boundary data form --bounds option?
>> 
>> Anyway, I prefer version 1 - keep complete relation, that could be 
>> useful for mkgmap.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Best regards,
>> Andrzej
>> _______________________________________________
>> mkgmap-dev mailing list
>> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev [1]

Links:
------
[1] http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/attachments/20150521/1641d221/attachment.html>