2009/12/10 Fox Mulder <quakem...@gmx.net>: > Neil Jerram wrote: >> 2009/12/10 Fox Mulder <quakem...@gmx.net>: >>> Neil Jerram wrote: >>>> 2009/12/9 arne anka <openm...@ginguppin.de>: >>>>> not to belittle the effort -- but in what respect will it be different >>>>> from navit? >>>>> would it be worth a consideration to use navit's engine, maybe improving >>>>> it and add a new efl based interface? >>>> Good question. >>>> >>>> For me the frustrating thing about navit is that it doesn't share maps >>>> with tangogps. So: >>>> >>>> - if you do consider helping navit instead, please consider enhancing >>>> it to use the same maps as tangogps >>>> >>>> - if you continue with your own project, please consider making it use >>>> the same maps as tangogps. >>> I don't think that this would be a good choice at all. >>> Tangogps uses png pictures with no routing information within these >>> files. For a navigation application you need vector images to determine >>> the path for routing. And the data for maybe a whole country in png and >>> for all zoom levels would be a few gigabyte with tens of thousands of >>> files. Compared to the vector format navit uses which is only a few >>> hundred megabytes in one file. And it could be rendered in all zoom >>> levels because it is in vector format. >>> So if something should be changed, than it should be tangogps and >>> allother apps that uses png files to use a vector format like navit does >>> which is way better for this purpose. >> >> Thanks for following up and explaining this; what you say makes sense. >> I suppose I was representing the non-technical point of view: "I've >> already downloaded a pile of map data once, why should I need to >> install or download it again?" I can see now why navit can't use only >> tangogps's bitmap data. >> >> But I would guess that a combination could work well: bitmap data for >> display, plus vector data for routing. The bitmap data could be >> shared. It would take a lot of space per tile, but would only be >> needed for places visited and zoom levels used. The vector data would >> be needed over a much larger area, but would take much less space per >> square kilometer. >> >> I guess the problem then would be ensuring consistency between the >> vector and bitmap data... > > If you already have the vector data you doesn't need the bitmap data > anymore because you can render the displayed map directly from these > data. That is what navit already does and therefor a combination of > vector and bitmap data makes no sense. It would make the data redundant > and more complicated. > > Ciao, > Rainer
I find very useful to have a mixture of vectorial and bitmap not to load the same data but other data like sat pictures, geological data, or historical ones etc etc. David Reyes Samblas Martinez http://www.tuxbrain.com Open ultraportable & embedded solutions Openmoko, Openpandora, Arduino Hey, watch out!!! There's a linux in your pocket!!! > > _______________________________________________ > Openmoko community mailing list > community@lists.openmoko.org > http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community > _______________________________________________ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community