So your idea was basically: User has splitted a data file covering city A in the upper part and city B in the lower part. Now user wants to ask mkgmap creating a map with that data file for city A only by giving mkgmap a polygon only covering upper part of that data tile.
Ok, I haven't thought about it. So I would agree with you, that both maps should follow that given poly-file. That would also make handling of overlapping map areas, which are splitted in one step more easy. But will require some changes in splitter too. Following the above example, if I give splitter an osm-file with rectangle of city A and another rectangle of city B, splitter will create 2 data tiles. In case A and B are overlapping, 3 tiles will be created. But finally the tiles will be much better with that additional polygon, as splitter just can use one big tile instead of 2 or 3 smaller ones. At the moment some tiles of my maps are pretty small, because of that overlapping areas. Henning. On 12.01.2018 20:23, Gerd Petermann wrote: > Hi Henning, > > reg. Bremen: > I thought the other way around. Say you split and compile Niedersachsen as 15 > rectangular tiles. > Next you compile Bremen using some of these tiles and an polygon for Bremen > that is > only used for the overview map. I guess that would look very strange. > I also don't know yet if Garmin software complains when an overview map > doesn't fully > cover the tiles. > > Gerd > > ________________________________________ > Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-boun...@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von > Henning Scholland <o...@hscholland.de> > Gesendet: Freitag, 12. Januar 2018 13:16:19 > An: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk > Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] The 0x4b background polygon in the overview map > > Hi Gerd, > > I probably didn't got your issue. > > So far I understand I gave mkgmap a list of data tiles or already > compiled map tiles. based on this mkgmap creates a complete map. At the > moment the overview map is rectangle of maxlat,maxlon,minlat,minlon. > Based on my suggestion user in future would be able to gave a different > polygon for overview map. If I let mkgmap use the tiles of Bremen, I > should use a matching bounding polygon. Of course if overview map is > larger than detailed map, the exceeding area will only have rough > sea/land area and DEM. In your example, if I use Germany.poly for Bremen > map, I will see rough DEM of Germany and North Sea and Baltic Sea cost > line (based on polygon). I wouldn't see an issue unless it's fine for > Garmin. Are you talking about generating a partial map with > BaseCamp/MapSource? I haven't checked how Garmin handle overview map in > that case. > > I'm not sure, if Garmin supports smaller/larger overview maps then > detailed map area is available. That's why I was thinking about if we > need to gave some limits, like overview map shouldn't be larger than > actual rectangle or not covering all the detailed map area. > > Henning > > On 12.01.2018 19:43, Gerd Petermann wrote: >> Hi Henning, >> >> I don't think that we should apply a bounding polygon only to the overview >> map. >> If you compile tiles for whole Germany and produce a map for Bremen using >> some of these tiles and an overview map that was created with a proper >> polygon >> I would assume that this looks strange when you zoom in/out. >> >> I don't understand what you mean with maximizing/minimizing the polygon. >> Please explain. >> >> Gerd >> >> ________________________________________ >> Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-boun...@lists.mkgmap.org.uk> im Auftrag von >> Henning Scholland <o...@hscholland.de> >> Gesendet: Freitag, 12. Januar 2018 12:35:04 >> An: mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk >> Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] The 0x4b background polygon in the overview map >> >> Hi Gerd, >> >> I think this would be best and additionally I would suggest to make the >> polygon defined by user (as suggested in DEM-poly and precomp-sea >> thread). As default I would limit overview map to the map tiles. Maybe >> then we should name the parameter --overview-map-polygon=filename >> >> I'm not sure, if the actual rectangle should be maximizing the polygon >> and the map tile area minimizing it or if Garmin doesn't care at all >> about it. If no external sea-data is given I would keep map tile area as >> background polygon. Otherwise it will look strange. >> >> Henning >> >> On 12.01.2018 19:19, Gerd Petermann wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> up to now mkgmap always creates a rectangular 0x4b polygon for the overview >>> map. I wonder >>> if I should change that so that the 0x4b polygons of the sub tiles are used. >>> This seems to be the better way if we start using non-rectangular 0x4b >>> polygons? >>> >>> Gerd >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mkgmap-dev mailing list >>> mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk >>> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> mkgmap-dev mailing list >> mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev >> _______________________________________________ >> mkgmap-dev mailing list >> mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk >> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev > _______________________________________________ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk > http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev > _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev