On Monday, June 27, 2011 at 07:13 CEST,
Dane Springmeyer <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jun 26, 2011, at 12:56 PM, Magnus Bäck wrote:
>
> > FWIW, filtering out adjacent points that are <100 m apart made
> > the map render perfectly with no crossing lines. I didn't need
> > any better resolution anyway. Still curious to know why I got
> > the described behavior in the first place though, and to know
> > if there's any way to avoid it without preprocessing the data.
>
> Magnus,
>
> Just looking at your example "crossed-track.png" now. I don't see any
> way those could be rendering artifacts, but perhaps I'm overlooking
> something. Can you post your raw data somewhere so I can take a look?
Sure, feel free to have a look at
http://elwood.jpl.se/~magnus/train_beijing_hunan.gpx, or
http://elwood.jpl.se/~magnus/whole-track.png which contains
a rendering of the whole track rather than just the cropped
portion found in crossed-track.png.
So, I converted that GPX file into a shapefile with gpx2shp
before feeding it to Mapnik. As I didn't see any crossing lines
when viewing either the GPX file nor the shapefile I've assumed
it was somehow related to Mapnik. Also, the lines are (in most
cases) a little bit too perpendicular and of equal length to
indicate a problem with the data itself.
--
Magnus Bäck
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Mapnik-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/mapnik-users
