Hi all, my observations at resolution 22: I think the patch re-introduces rendering problems at T-shaped crossings, sometimes they look like t-shapes at lower resolutions. Sample: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/260418111
It seems to filter more small polygons, even with --min-size-polygon=0. I think it tends to make polygons smaller, not sure why. It sometimes reduces wrong zig-zagging, but only for ways with many points. In cities, where roads are often split into many small parts it sometimes makes things worse. It probably helps for the special case contour lines and therefore I suggest to limit it to them. Maybe the code to find the best place for a rounded coord should also consider to remove the point if that would give the best result. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <[email protected]> im Auftrag von Gerd Petermann <[email protected]> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 28. April 2021 15:21 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] mkgmap-dev Digest, Vol 153, Issue 40 Resolution 23 raster problems Hi Felix, I expect (more) small missing parts of complex shapes like forests or waterway areas (those without mkgmap:skipSizeFilter=true) and more obvious differences between shapes and lines, e.g. if a style renders outlines of buildings. The maps are very different at res 22, so it is hard to say if there are more improvements then worsenings. I've experimented with different orders of filters in the past. It's difficult to test because the changes heavily depend on the Styte AND the mapped objects AND the mappers preferences. For example, if landuse areas are glued to highways or not, if landuse areas are glued to other landuse areas or if there nodes are just very close. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <[email protected]> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <[email protected]> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 28. April 2021 14:58 An: Development list for mkgmap Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] mkgmap-dev Digest, Vol 153, Issue 40 Resolution 23 raster problems Oh I thought it was mainly meant for contourlines. Did not know you intend it to be used in general. I am not really sure how and where to check for quality. On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 at 20:13, Gerd Petermann <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi Felix, your screen shots only show contour lines but the patch works on all types of lines and polygons. So, please also check the results with other maps. Gerd ________________________________________ Von: mkgmap-dev <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 28. April 2021 04:54 An: Development list for mkgmap; Andrzej Popowski Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] mkgmap-dev Digest, Vol 153, Issue 40 Resolution 23 raster problems forgot 1.3 value - that is good enough (and this location is not the most difficult, but there are very few places that are worse. So I feel it's good enough as if it's fine here - there are very very few other places that are still problematic. On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 at 10:50, Felix Hartmann <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: Thanks for that patch, the improvement is not as big as from the previous patch - but there is some. I analysed it a bit more - and I think there needs to be one more change - actually in general and not only for contourlines. We need different values for the douglas peucker algorithm depending on resolution! Right now we can only set one value, and that is multiplied for each resolution? Based on the current state I would like to have resolution 24= 0.0 or maybe actually have it active at 24 as well trying a value of 0.3 or so. Where there any problems with autorouting or why is it not possible to use it at resolution 24 as well? 23=1.3 22=2.6 21=3.9 20-11=5.4 Especially if we produce a map without resolution 24, then resolution 23 needs to have much lower DP value than the subsequent resolutions. Using 1.3 for resolution 23 makes the quality IMHO good enough to be used for an contourlines only map for GPS devices and skipping resolution 24 altogether. For Desktop use resolution 24 may still make sense for contourlines - but even then the difference is only in very steep areas. Attached some screenshots at resolution 24, and at 23 with different DP values and one of patch2. On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 at 23:16, Andrzej Popowski <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: Hi, some more experiments, see attached patch. I have tried to optimize rounding of coordinates for lowest distance to line. This is not good for polygons, because can creates gaps between adjacent polygons. -- Best regards, Andrzej _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
