On 10 November 2010 00:33, xelawho <[email protected]> wrote: > > Anyway, searching around the forum, it seems to me that there are two > options: > 1) convert my polylines and polygons to encoded polylines and polygons > 2) convert my xml file to kml
KML is only a particular form of XML. If you interpret KML yourself, it won't make any difference. If you use GGeoXml for the KML, then it might make a difference because Google decide what to do with it. It may come back as a tile layer, which will certainly render faster. Encoded polylines and polygons will be better than non-encoded; and they have the added side-effect that there is less data for a page to load than with non-encoded lines. Encoded polygons zoom better as points which make no difference to the overall shape are removed. At extremely high zooms (>18 or thereabouts) you may notice that some detail remains missing. I do think you have made the right diagnosis and proposed the right treatments for the problem. It's possible that creating and overlaying encoded polygons will be less effort than reworking your XML as KML, so you could try that first. The best resource for encoded polylines, including an encoding form to make it easy, is Prof Mark McClure's at http://facstaff.unca.edu/mcmcclur/GoogleMaps/EncodePolyline/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Maps API V2" 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.
