well as for your proposal - the same could be achieved by addind a
function like
{set mkgmap:polygon-size-max-limit=24:300000 ; 23:200000 ; 22:150000 ..}
and then there is no need to calculate the size in m². Especially if you
want to use this for checking against broken polygons regulary, you will
need to basically add sensible values for each of your lines in the
polygon file - hence that will need quite a bit of computation time, and
then using some data existing should be much quicker then first
calculating this number.
I did not plan to use this widespread - just for certain polygon types
that are very often used for micromapping (and micromapping is a thing I
rather omit, sadly people go f*ck crazy in Vienna, mapping all
boardwalks, rubbish bins, gullies and even indoor ways of every floor of
public buildings in some universities. - due to garmin units precision
this already means no more straight streets at intersections and similar
problems)
On 10.07.2013 20:36, Henning Scholland wrote:
>
> Am 10.07.2013 20:13, schrieb Felix Hartmann:
>> what's the difference?
>
> Hi, the unit isn't the real difference. If it's easyer to calculate
> Garmin-units² it would also be ok. The difference between our the
> proposals is: In my proposal you get the polygon-size as a value and
> can handle it in style. So for example you can also avoid a much to
> large building or so. (Maybe you remeber the very large
> Aldi-supermarket some month ago.) In you proposal it would only be
> possible to remove small polygons.
>
> Henning
>
--
keep on biking and discovering new trails
Felix
openmtbmap.org & www.velomap.org
_______________________________________________
mkgmap-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
