Hi > 1. If the goal is to shift the boundaries onto a coarse grid, why round > *down* for longitudes and *up* for latitudes? Why not round in the same > direction for both?
Even though I made that change (originally it rounded down/up in the same way as your patch). I have no idea why one goes up and the other down! Probably no good reason. > Finally, I am wondering how important the rounding is. It seems that > mkgmap will happily process arbitrary .osm files, including those that > never passed through the splitter and thus do not have rounded > boundaries. Would it be possible to leave out the rounding? Or is it > needed for inter-tile routing for example? For routing to work across tiles the nodes at the edge of the tile must match exactly (or within a few units at least) the edge node of the same road in the adjacent tile. The page: http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/page/17 gives some background on the original design. The point about rounding to the course boundaries is not true from the point of view of the Garmin format. At the time I didn't know how to make it work without putting them on course boundaries, but now we probably could. In general the tiles can have completely arbitary boundaries that follow a country border for example, but this would need corresponding support in mkgmap. ..Steve _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
