On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 18:07:44 +0100, Ralf wrote in message 

> AnMaster wrote:
> > Good question, I guess combining them and manually fixing the
> > problems would be too much work. I got no really good solution. But
> > the current coastlines are very bad in many cases.
> > 
> > What about only using GHSSH for those coastlines around continents?
> > With that I mean coast line  around, say, North and south America,
> > Europe/Africa/Asia (that, apart from the Suez channel, are
> > connected), Australia and any islands, and simply discard any
> > coastlines inside these "blocks" and use vmap0 there. That is:
> > don't trust how vmap0/GHSSH classify the data. Would that be
> > feasible?
> Feasible, as GSHHS explicitly makes the outer coastlines available and
> differentiates them from inner shorelines, but it wouldn't solve the
> problems with inconsistent waterways at the coastlines of continents.
> Even though that is a lot of work, manually adapting our VMAP0-based
> data to the GSHHS-data is the only solution I currently see.

..an idea out of the blue; if we model sea water, and the 
sea floor, we could _generate_ the coastline at runtime?  
It does move with high 'n low tide.

..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... 
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
  Scenarios always come in sets of three: 
  best case, worst case, and just in case.

This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
Flightgear-devel mailing list

Reply via email to