Christian, thanks, this make perfect sense now. eager to test when you get the support for non-closed coastlines.
apo On Aug 2, 2009, at 8:32 AM, Christian Gawron wrote: > Dear Apollinaris, > > this is a misunderstanding. > > I use the relation internally: > The code right now creates a relation with the sea as "outer" and the > (closed) coastline segments as "inner" members. This way I don't > have to > think about how to "punch the holes" into the sea. > What is still missing is the handling of non-closed coastline > segments - > these have to be added to the "outer" polygon. > > There is no need for a relation in the raw data. > > Best wishes > Christian > > Apollinaris Schoell schrieb: >> this is really great to get sea polygons. makes maps really much >> better >> Don't understand why is there a need for relations? >> is it common to have relations for coastline? have never seen it. my >> understanding is the right side of the way is sea, left side is land. >> how can the knowledge of inner way help here except in the case of an >> island where you have the whole closed polygon available to make a >> decision. >> it's nearly impossible to build a relation for a whole continent. due >> to restriction in relation members you would need parent relations >> collecting all pieces. and when done all coastlines will be inner >> elements. there can't be an outer element except you extend the >> definition to leave earth >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mkgmap-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev >> > > _______________________________________________ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
