On 23.03.2010 21:45, Mark Burton wrote:
> Hello Felix,
>
>
>> Could it be that the new for polygons "8" is much much bigger compared
>> to the old (using patch) "8"???
>> Or that the patch was not enacted on resolution 24??
>>
> Err, why?
>
> Mark
> ___
On 23.03.2010 21:56, Mark Burton wrote:
> Felix,
>
>
>> Or that the patch was not enacted on resolution 24??
>>
> Yes, that's true and looking at the code, I think that for polygons it
> probably should always be done and, furthermore, should be done after
> the polygon splitting so that
Felix,
> Or that the patch was not enacted on resolution 24??
Yes, that's true and looking at the code, I think that for polygons it
probably should always be done and, furthermore, should be done after
the polygon splitting so that any tiny polygons produced by the
splitting get removed. i.e. i
Hello Felix,
> Could it be that the new for polygons "8" is much much bigger compared
> to the old (using patch) "8"???
> Or that the patch was not enacted on resolution 24??
Err, why?
Mark
___
mkgmap-dev mailing list
mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk
On 23.03.2010 10:07, svn commit wrote:
> Version 1621 was commited by markb on 2010-03-23 09:07:10 + (Tue, 23 Mar
> 2010)
>
> Add --min-line-size and --min-polygon-size options.
>
> Allow the user to specify the minimum size of line and polygon features.
> Features smaller than that at a given
Version 1621 was commited by markb on 2010-03-23 09:07:10 + (Tue, 23 Mar
2010)
Add --min-line-size and --min-polygon-size options.
Allow the user to specify the minimum size of line and polygon features.
Features smaller than that at a given zoom level are dropped.
The defaults are 1 for
