Hmm. I'm not sure, whether this explains what happens here. I have double checked a couple of coordinates from the database (just a few, so the conclusion might be vague). But for all checked coordinates (used a GPS device) was the given point from the database exactly as measured by GPS and correctly displayed on the map, where it should be.
But if you have some sort of alignment algorithm, which corrects a 4326 source to match Google's Mercator projection (strange wording, indeed. I always thought, Mercator is universal...), I could apply that to every point coordinate and see, what's happening with the polygons. Regards bratliff schrieb: >> the original data has been SRID tagged as 4326, like this line (snip) shows: >> So with my limited knowledge I did treat that to be WGS84... >> > > EPSG:4326 is different than Google's Mercator projection. At low > numbered zoom levels, it produces a South to North shift in the > Northern Hemisphere. At high numbered zoom levels, it is > insignificant. Cutting the EPSG:4326 source into tiles helps to mask > the difference. Every tile is correctly aligned at the corners but > incorrectly aligned in the middle. > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Maps API" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Maps-API?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
