On Mon, Sep 08, 2008 at 01:43:18PM +0200, Jiri Klement wrote:
> > Right now we can easily switch between osma (XSLT)/orp and inkscape/batik
> > because the output of these alternatives is identical.
> 
> Actually it is not. XSLT and orp use different algorithm for icon
> placing. You can see it in images from the first mail (*). The images
> have extra symbol - bus in the middle of woods - to show how
> xslt/orp/areacenter deal with different shapes.

What is it you actually do different from the XSLT version, and how is
it that it is better?

Just so you know, I think there are some differences between the
writeup on my website and the XSLT implementation, mainly in the last
step.

There is an unfinished version of my area-center algorithm in or/p, I
haven't had time to fix it, but wouldn't it be easier to just fix it
than to create something new in yet another language that not all the
developers understand?

> The area center preprocessor can be rewritten in perl. It will make it
> harder to manage, but it's possible. Anyway I think Java dependency is
> worth including because you can do nice tricks with osmosis and batik.

How is that harder to manage? To me a java app is much harder to
manage given that I know exactly nothing about java, and plan to keep
it that way.

-- 
Knut Arne Bjørndal
aka Bob Kåre
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
Tilesathome mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tilesathome

Reply via email to