On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:42:53AM +0100, Chris-Hein Lunkhusen wrote: > WanMil schrieb: > > > This is caused by the new mp code. The methods contains(JoinedWay, > > JoinedWay) and createContainsMatrix(..) are not optimal for large and > > lots of polygons (both apply to Norway). > > And what about the realy large boundary MPs used in Germany > and Netherlands (other areas use type=boundary for boundaries). > > Maybe we should internaly convert them to type=boundary > so that they don't stress the MP code ? > > Chris > > [1] <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Boundaries> > [2] <http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/62781> (land_area MP) > [3] <http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/51477> (maritime)
Actually, type=boundary relations can define multipolygons too if they contain enclaves or exclaves. An example would be the city of Espoo, which surrounds the city of Kauniainen: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/relation/36097 I am not sure if that would matter, though. Someone might want to define polygons for boundaries (e.g., for highlighting the area), but usually border lines should be enough. Marko _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
