"Norman Vine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Martin Spott writes:
>> Oh, we _do_ have the ability to produce higer res data by hand. The >> missing bit is a mechanism to modify the automatic scenery build so >> that we can specify an order of different data sources to query. >> This way we could have a set of manually edited data for several >> places, we could have not that reliable but still pretty high >> resolution data and we culd have standard VMap0 data (the same applies >> to the source of terrain elevation). >> It would be nice if we could automatically merge hand higher resolution >> data into the automatic build, > You hit the proverbial nail square on the head :-) Oh, thanks. Please note (the standard dsclaimer) that I'm only expressing my thougts. I don't intend to push anyone to do that - although it would make me personally happy if it happened :-)) > This can be turned into a Polygon Algebra abstraction, and as I am > sure Curt and David would attest to, generic polygon geometry is *tough*. Does it really have to be _that_ difficult ? Every piece of manually refined land cover or terrain elevation could be tagged with a surrounding polygon. This way the refined data could simply be dropped as a replacement into the corresponding area. Right ? There's not _that_ much maths related, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
