On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:46:02PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Florian Lohoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 06:53:13AM +0200, spaetz wrote: > >> Lower priority items: > >> - Reimplement tileset complexity measure. > > > > As an idea concerning the complexity measure - Could the number of > > objects be simply used? E.g. the client downloads the data via the api > > and simply counts points and ways e.g: > > Err, what's wrong with the existing complexity measure which does > exactly that. Well, it scales it to a number 0..15 but that's about > it.
Have you had a look at the complexity distribution? Complexity 5 http://tah.openstreetmap.org/Tiles/info.php?x=2134&y=1348&z=12 Complexity 6 http://tah.openstreetmap.org/Tiles/info.php?x=2141&y=1357&z=12 Complexity 7 http://tah.openstreetmap.org/Tiles/info.php?x=2143&y=1357&z=12 Complexity 8 http://tah.openstreetmap.org/Tiles/info.php?x=2143&y=1354&z=12 Complexity 9 http://tah.openstreetmap.org/Tiles/info.php?x=2145&y=1352&z=12 Complexity 10 http://tah.openstreetmap.org/Tiles/info.php?x=2099&y=1354&z=12 So i have a hard time finding something above 10 and below 5. Breaking down an infinite number of objects into in finite scale will always have its problems. Just the examples above make a difference between 100MByte needed and probably something like 4-10GByte needed. A more finegrained and more deterministic resource requirement would be appreciated. Flo -- Florian Lohoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] +49-171-2280134 Those who would give up a little freedom to get a little security shall soon have neither - Benjamin Franklin
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Tilesathome mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tilesathome
