Steve Ratcliffe wrote: > One thing to add is that ideally you want to split tiles so that they are > smaller where there is more detail and larger elsewhere. If you look at > the map viewer on the Garmin web site, for example - Metro Guide Europe, > you can see the tile outlines. Over London they are much smaller than > anything we do, although there is just one tile over much of Wales. Of > course they have more data. > True, the current 'hard' 0.25 sq tilesize isn't optimal (though necessary to hold the Rotterdam area), but that is simply a matter of defining my bboxes differently and does not solve the actual problem where ways are missing on tileborders.
On the other hand; if there is no problem with the tile crossing ways then there seems no real reason not to use the small square size: Units with much storage space don't suffer and units with limited storage have the advantage of a fine grained tileset (so you can travel further without running out of space possibly). _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
