Gerd Petermann <[email protected]> writes: > as you said we have to live with the limitations of the Garmin img > format and the routing algo. My understanding is that the default > style should produce reasonable results for correct input data.
Yes, that's of course a good general principle. > If I got you right you'd like to have some user interface (maybe > sliders in a GUI) to express your preferences of different road types > or surface types and that should be used to "fine tune" the values for > road_speed, road_class, and the unpaved flag so that one doesn't have > to understand all the complex rules? I should say that I am unclear enough about what would be ideal that I don't want to be on record as making a specific software request. But yes, some general framework for expressing how the user wants road costs to work, which leads to those changes, sounds like a good idea. It may be that the reasonable default rules we are evolving are good enough, so that more complicated schemes are not worth their cost. Anyway, thanks for listening.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
