Hi Curt, I moved this to the dev list. I think I understand the issues people are having and they all appear to happen on the transition to/from OSM levels. There is also an area select issue, but I'm pretty sure that is a minor issue, probably an off-by-one type of thing.
I spent well into late last night (this morning) trying to find the right place to put in the transition from continuous scaling to levels but I'm not quite there. I know what needs to be done but I'm still learning the code and looking for a single place that covers all the transitions. I started to look at scaling the bit maps, but that will require still another learning curve and would still need to learn the flow of the program. So I don't feel like I'm wasting time fixing the transition problem, nor do I think it will slow down the alternate scaling. I would also like to propose, to be implemented at the same time as the scaling change, a user option to use either the OSM levels or the linear scaling. My reasoning is that scaling bit maps generally produces blocky and/or blurry images. My personal preference is to trade off better looking maps for less flexibility in setting the scale, but I understand that others will have a different preference and I think I can accommodate both. I also want to get to the point where we can cache and use the OSM tiles rather than large bitmaps. A slippy map implementation would be great, but probably beyond my present skills. The use of tile caching should provide a faster interface and eliminate large downloads for small position changes. I have to travel for a couple of days starting tomorrow afternoon. So my goal, assuming you are not adamant that I not do it, is to fix the transition error before I leave. Then I can get started on the linear scaling when I get back. Will that be OK? ...jerry On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Curt, WE7U <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 9 Jun 2010, Jerry Dunmire wrote: > >> Thanks Tom for the analysis. I'll look into where else calling the >> adj_to_OSM_levels() >> needs to be called as a short term fix until I can figure out (really >> just learn what's already there) a better scaling method. > > Considering the types of issues people are having, I'd urge you do > concentrate instead on learning how the other map modules do their > scaling, then fix up the OSM module. A better use of your time. > > If we get too ancy before that's complete then we can do the > short-term fixes ourselves. > > -- > Curt, WE7U. <http://www.eskimo.com/~archer> > APRS: Where it's at! <http://www.xastir.org> > Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math. - unknown > Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates. - WE7U. > The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!" > _______________________________________________ > Xastir mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir > _______________________________________________ Xastir-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir-dev
