[mkgmap-dev] Update on missing POI Labels on some devices and some questions...

Sat Dec 7 16:07:46 GMT 2024

I agree with Ticker; there is also something else which MAY help:

If your Garmin came with maps its worth checking which points do show up.

  A TYP file may be included into the gmapsupp which will should reveal
some of the types used - Gmaptool can export this supfile

Regards

Nick

On 07/12/2024 15:52, Ticker Berkin wrote:
> Hi Scott
>
> There is some consistency across Garmin models I've come across for a set of
> standard POIs that have a (semi-)defined meaning; but I don't know if Garmin are
> breaking this with devices like XT, Tread...
>
> By semi-defined I mean they respond to appropriate 'FIND' searches and some
> devices actually show what considers the POI to be. There are various lists of
> these around the internet and, from a mkgmap distribution,
> ./examples/styles/default/points shows usage.
>
> Sticking to these can make a reasonably well-featured map that works on many
> devices.
>
> Many POI types don't show at low resolution!
>
> For the POI you've mentioned, I've noted from experimentation:
>   0x14 No icon. Country. Big font. no subtypes	{major country}
>   0x1e No icon. has name. State {province/region}. no subtypes
>
> I don't think you get any difference in the final map and behaviour whether the
> input is MP or from OSM (osm.pbf, o5m, etc format)
>
> https://www.mkgmap.org.uk > Documentation is a starting point for help.
>
> Ticker
>
>
> On Fri, 2024-12-06 at 10:47 -0800, scott taggart wrote:
>>    As I posted here on 2024.12.01, I was having issues with POIs not displaying
>> labels for some garmin devices (specifically the XT2 and Tread) when
>> generating /img files using mp file input to mkgmap.  I did some exploration
>> and discovered this (maybe well known but not by me):
>>     * Each device model displays POIs differently (i.e., type 0x100 does not
>> show the same thing). There seems to be no consistency across models (Felix
>> echoed this in a follow-up post).
>>   * Each model displays labels for each POI type differently (some show no
>> label, others show small vs big text).  There seems to be no consistency
>> across models.
>>   * I attempted to use the custom "[_point]" feature of the mp files and mkgmap
>> but the custom point bitmaps only work for some garmins.  Even then, it didn't
>> help with my missing [poi] labels.
>>   * Prior to the labels not working on the XT2 and Tread units, I always used
>> the 0x1400 POI code type for my labels.  With a lot of cross-model
>> experimentation I discovered a single POI code (0x1E00) will display large
>> text on all garmin models I was able to test with (Montana 6XX and 7XX, XT,
>> XT2, Tread).  I have no idea if this POI code will work with all garmins that
>> support custom maps.
>>
>>   Questions:
>>    * Are these issues with each model behaving differently with respect to POI
>> types well-known?  If so, how are they gotten around by (OSM) map builders?
>> How can a single map be built that has POIs and labels that are consistent
>> across more than one device.  What am I missing?
>>   * How does OSM handle this?  I presume that an OSM map generated for an area
>> works on all garmin devices?  I will admit that I don't know what the OSM map
>> limitations are across garmin models.  Does the JOSN model allow the devices
>> POI maps to be loaded on a per-map basis?  If I were to switch to JOSN model
>> for mkgmap input, could I get around all the device limitations I am running
>> into with the mp file format?  Can someone recommend a good tutorial on
>> getting up to speed on generating JOSN for simple map input to mkgmap?
>>   * OSM uses the JOSM model to feed mkgmap.  Does that model allow for more
>> flexibility and control than the "mp" input file model?  I presume the MP file
>> format is obsolete.
>>   * Is there any better documentation for the MPO format than the CGPSMAPPER
>> pdf file floating around on the internet?
>>   * Can anyone recommend either a different website or people whom I may
>> contact for further help with any of this?
>>
>>   Any and all help is appreciated.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mkgmap-dev mailing list
>> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
>> https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev