Hi WanMil, thanks for testing. Today I found one more rule in Garmin maps that we ignore when writing NOD data. I have no idea yet if that is important or how to implement the rule.
Gerd > Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2014 12:15:42 +0100 > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [mkgmap-dev] additional arcs patch > > I have compared results from the branch and the trunk. > > I have to revert my suspicion: distances are equal. > > I see some differences in routing so that it seems that larger roads are > much more prefered in trunk than in branch. I'll have to check if that's > good or bad :-) > > WanMil > > > Ignore the Google result. > > > > I am quite sure that there is a difference between the high-prec-coords > > branch and the trunk. I need to recompile the map with the trunk to > > confirm this. > > > > WanMil > > > >> Please, forgive my 2 cents on this: > >> > >> Depending on which projection each system is using, distance calculation > >> may (and usually) differ by that much and maybe more. As far as I know, > >> Google uses a Mercator-like projection on a spherical Earth model, which > >> is not correct since Google coordinates refer to the WGS-84 ellipsoid. > >> So you can expect differences, greater with higher latitudes. > >> > >> So don't use Google as an accurate reference. > >> > >> all the best, > >> > >> Paulo > >> > >> > >> 2014-02-20 17:23 GMT-03:00 WanMil <[email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]>>: > >> > >> Hi Gerd, > >> > >> which difference do you expect regarding the indirect links? I want > >> to get an idea what I should check on my device. > >> > >> I have compiled a map using the patch and it seems that distances > >> are slightly underestimated. > >> One example: The distance between Hambug, An der Alster and Munich, > >> Maximiliansplatz: > >> MapSource: 776km > >> Google Maps: 788km > >> Both use the same route. > >> > >> I didn't notice it before. > >> > >> WanMil > >> > >> Hi all, > >> > >> attached is a patch for r3065 in the high-prec-coord branch. > >> > >> It should improve long distance routing, as it adds additional > >> arcs from minor roads to major roads (so called indirect links). > >> Maybe the improvement is only seen on the device. > >> > >> It would be great to hear some test results (good or bad), > >> compared to trunk r3057 and compared to r3065. > >> > >> A compiled binary is here: > >> |http://files.mkgmap.org.uk/__download/179/mkgmap.jar > >> <http://files.mkgmap.org.uk/download/179/mkgmap.jar> > >> > >> |Gerd > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _________________________________________________ > >> mkgmap-dev mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]> > >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/__mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev > >> <http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev> > >> > >> > >> _________________________________________________ > >> mkgmap-dev mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]> > >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/__mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev > >> <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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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
