On 27 July 2016 at 09:29, Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> reg. the idea of "cutting out overlaps": I guess it would consume quite a > lot of CPU and it would heavily increase the img size > > because we would have to write many more points. Think of a shape for > "place=village" with hundreds of holes for each building > > shape. Up to now we save the shape for the village and the shapes for the > buildings. With cutting we have to calculate what > > remains of the village shape, this would be a very complex shape with many > holes, so it would have many points. > > I don't think that would be a good idea. > > Well that's why I wrote we will need an additional file in the style-file for this. So only for certain polygons this should be done. Prime examples are: any kind of forest, most kind of water, and maybe a handful more. However definitely not buildings or for example poygons you can put semi-transparent. I'm quite sure with this limited approach 90% of problems would be gone. And mapsize only a couple percent bigger. However I have no clue about complexity and CPU cycles for such a limited approach. -- Felix Hartman - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org Schusterbergweg 32/8 6020 Innsbruck Austria - Österreich
_______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
