> Dave writes: > > I certainly sympathise with this point of view. The current format is > certainly crude. However, the problems with it only become apparent close > up, when either close to or on the ground, and trying to follow taxiways > at intersections. The taxiway layouts done in the current format > definately improve the view of the airport on approach, when the > deficiencies are too far away to be apparent.
The other thing to consider is the 'fun' factor. TD does a great job of getting the raw data in to the editor; importing the images from USGS images automagically was a great idea. But after that comes the actual editing. Producing accurate curves can be trying, especially if they're convex. Since there're curves all over, it becomes an important part of the process. If editing taxiways becomes as easy as importing the image data, a lot more people will do it and we'll all wind up with more airports (and a better user experience.) Just my 2c :) -joe _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
