siliconfiend at gmail.com
Tue May 6 19:23:37 BST 2008
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 11:06 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog at gmail.com>
> 2008/5/6 Karl Newman <siliconfiend at gmail.com>:
> > Sorry, but I think graph-edge relationships would be a step backwards
> > our mappers. It may be nice and technologically advanced, but we already
> > have problems with mappers understanding the clockwise/counterclockwise
> > rules;
> What clockwise/counterclockwise rules? Only coastlines have that, for
> a reason. For any other polygon which way you draw it is entirely
> irrelevent... If it's closed it's unambiguous.
> Have a nice day,
> Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog at gmail.com> http://svana.org/kleptog/
Hmm... I haven't experienced that personally, but I recall seeing some mails
on the list about that, I think especially with regard to multipolygons and
how not all the renderers were showing them properly unless the
clockwise/counterclockwise rules were met. But that's beside the point. It's
still too difficult for the average mapper, and given how we've been unable
to put a nice veneer on even basic relations (yes, I know someone will come
up with an example), it seems unlikley to ever have a graph-edge
relationship be user-friendly.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the dev