[mkgmap-dev] mkgmap-dev Digest, Vol 153, Issue 40 Resolution 23 raster problems
From Felix Hartmann extremecarver at gmail.com on Wed Apr 28 13:58:15 BST 2021
Oh I thought it was mainly meant for contourlines. Did not know you intend it to be used in general. I am not really sure how and where to check for quality. On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 at 20:13, Gerd Petermann < gpetermann_muenchen at hotmail.com> wrote: > Hi Felix, > > your screen shots only show contour lines but the patch works on all types > of lines and polygons. So, please also check the results with other maps. > > Gerd > > ________________________________________ > Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von > Felix Hartmann <extremecarver at gmail.com> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 28. April 2021 04:54 > An: Development list for mkgmap; Andrzej Popowski > Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] mkgmap-dev Digest, Vol 153, Issue 40 Resolution > 23 raster problems > > forgot 1.3 value - that is good enough (and this location is not the most > difficult, but there are very few places that are worse. So I feel it's > good enough as if it's fine here - there are very very few other places > that are still problematic. > > > On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 at 10:50, Felix Hartmann <extremecarver at gmail.com > <mailto:extremecarver at gmail.com>> wrote: > Thanks for that patch, the improvement is not as big as from the previous > patch - but there is some. > I analysed it a bit more - and I think there needs to be one more change - > actually in general and not only for contourlines. > > We need different values for the douglas peucker algorithm depending on > resolution! > > Right now we can only set one value, and that is multiplied for each > resolution? > Based on the current state I would like to have > > resolution > 24= 0.0 or maybe actually have it active at 24 as well trying a value of > 0.3 or so. Where there any problems with autorouting or why is it not > possible to use it at resolution 24 as well? > 23=1.3 > 22=2.6 > 21=3.9 > 20-11=5.4 > > > Especially if we produce a map without resolution 24, then resolution 23 > needs to have much lower DP value than the subsequent resolutions. Using > 1.3 for resolution 23 makes the quality IMHO good enough to be used for an > contourlines only map for GPS devices and skipping resolution 24 > altogether. For Desktop use resolution 24 may still make sense for > contourlines - but even then the difference is only in very steep areas. > > Attached some screenshots at resolution 24, and at 23 with different DP > values and one of patch2. > > On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 at 23:16, Andrzej Popowski <popej at poczta.onet.pl > <mailto:popej at poczta.onet.pl>> wrote: > Hi, > > some more experiments, see attached patch. I have tried to optimize > rounding of coordinates for lowest distance to line. This is not good > for polygons, because can creates gaps between adjacent polygons. > > -- > Best regards, > Andrzej > _______________________________________________ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk> > https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev > > > -- > Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org > > > > -- > Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org > > _______________________________________________ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk > https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev > -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/pipermail/mkgmap-dev/attachments/20210428/b2d1ddd2/attachment.html>
- Previous message: [mkgmap-dev] mkgmap-dev Digest, Vol 153, Issue 40 Resolution 23 raster problems
- Next message: [mkgmap-dev] mkgmap-dev Digest, Vol 153, Issue 40 Resolution 23 raster problems
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the mkgmap-dev mailing list