Good points all. And I realize my original point of making part of a line transparent was wrong. My code was too smart for my own good: I feed it an array of points with color specified. But in fact when the color changes, I start a new overlay. I had hidden that nicely in my code.
But "transparent" is a nice color to use for special situations. Just not here. So let's forget the whole thing :-) On Jun 23, 5:59 am, Andrew Leach <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jun 23, 12:31 am, Papa Bear <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I would just set the color of the segment between line 1 and line 2 to > > "transparent". You can certainly change color any where you like in > > non-encoded polylines. I don' know about encoded polylines (never saw > > the point of encoding them but maybe there's a reason in your case - > > you save space but lose precision and speed - but who cares about > > space in today's world.) > > Some people do! In my case the polygons are defined according to the > British National Grid and each point can be as little as a metre away > from its neighbour. So creating an encoded polyline reduces the number > of points dramatically without affecting the precision enough to make > it useless. That means that in my case speed is improved. It also > means that the polygons are simplified as you zoom out -- no point in > showing every wiggle along a river -- and as an added bonus it makes > it more difficult to steal the data. -- 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.
