On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 18:07:44 +0100, Ralf wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 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. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
