Worldwide routable Garmin maps: URL REMOVED

Cool. I’m also experimenting a bit with nicer indexing: http://osm.pleiades.uni-wuppertal.de/garmin/generic_new/16-04-2014/55ec29e103f4e439ab9a2904598f3ce3/

Nice, much better. Maybe instead of the footer Apache/2.2.22 (Ubuntu) Server etc add a license note from *_license.txt?

Map data (c) OpenStreetMap and its contributors
http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright

This map data is made available under the Open Database License: 
http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. 
Any rights in individual contents of the database are licensed under the 
Database Contents License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/dbcl/1.0/
Map created with mkgmap-r3189

BTW I dont see “new” in the mapname, it says “OSM generic routable(Netherlands)”
http://osm.pleiades.uni-wuppertal.de/garmin/generic_new/16-04-2014/55ec29e103f4e439ab9a2904598f3ce3/metadata/24528000.nsi

Hmm. I wonder if there is a way of determing the date of the OSM data being used. I’ve made updates to various places in New Jersey, US and they aren’t in the garmin maps downloaded from openfietsmap.nl.

It’s not perfect, but the date of the map gives an idea. This date is when the update process started and one of the first things the process does is updating the local copy of the OSM planet with daily extracts. The local planet is at least one day behind the start date (and in some cases it can be two days).

The rule of thumb is therefore the version date minus two days.

If I look in the download box of for instance Iceland, it also shows
country: Netherlands
version: 16-04-2014 :wink:
http://osm.pleiades.uni-wuppertal.de/garmin/generic_new/16-04-2014/0b3a65f8b63d4fc923520dd76deaa26a/

I also noticed that the new version and the old version both have the same name: OSM generic routable(Netherlands)
This means that if I install the new version first, and afterwards the old, it warns that a previous map has been found.
So this is not too bad. You can either install the old version or the new style version, not both.
If we want them both, the map name of the new style should be different: OSM generic routable new (Netherlands)

That is a very dumb copy/paste error on my part. Fixed in the code.

The description is changed to OSM generic routable new.

As always: thanks for the feedback, Ligfietser!

Ik zag een fietspad routeer probleem in een new style kaart van 11-3-2014, maar dat is netjes opgelost in de new style kaart van 16-4-2014. Ik heb wat paginas terug gelezen en had het idee dat er met de routering wat verbeteringen waren doorgevoerd dus dat moest ik eerst even testen.
Oftewel Bedankt :wink:

Sorry not in English …
Noticed some routing errors in basecamp with car/motor using bicycle paths on a new style map from march. In recent maps it is fixed thnx :wink:

At least in basecamp, now I get a route calculation error on my oregon 300 and I have not figured out why or where yet. Same route as with 11-3 map which is fine.

The new naming and numbering system is REALLY APPRECIATED and made it very easy to do an A - B comparison, thnx.

The other thing I noticed while scrolling around in the area in basecamp.
The rendering of motorway_link might be not the most preferable way. Take a look at knooppunt ijselmonde ridderkerk which is a beautiful spaghetti highway system in real life but on the map it is only visible when all the way zoomed in basecamp. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/7325163
same for kleinpolderplein terbrechseplein knooppunt benulux etc. Although for the last one also google maps is heaving issues for the shear size of the spaghetti. knooppunt Ypenburg is also a nice example close to Rijswijk.

On my gps(oregon300) the motorway_link are reasonable sized(on the thin end) dark grey lines visible while zoomed out, with the high chance of cluttering they are probably good as they are.

It seems like my gps does not like the changes that were made last month in the routing.

With the custom tile selection map I made 11-3-2014 I could route from rotterdam to wuppertal if I allowed it to use highways no intermediate points needed. with the dutch map from 16-4-2014 I cannot even route from rotterdam to amsterdam without the route calculation error, obviously I tried that as well with the map from 11-3-2014 and that was no problem.
Sorry I really just wanted to give a thumbs up :sunglasses: , but will trying some things I found this issue :frowning: and by now I should have opened a new thread.

Mafketel,
Wait for the next update, Ive adjusted the routing after some remarks on the Dutch forum. Maybe this solve your issues too.
About rendering motorway links, the map uses the default Garmin style. This doesnt look very fancy on Basecamp but I’ll have a look at the zoomlevels.

I will wait.

Something changed between 11-3 and 16-4 update.

Actually quite a lot with zooming :wink: in basecamp and for the better, I really like the fact that railways are visible much longer when you zoom out. and that at 700m the railways are rendered with the gray white dash.
only at 200m the railroad yard between zwijndrecht and barendrecht becomes visible same as the outlines of the buildings, also a good thing.
And then railway tunnels are actually visible until 3km.
In the 11-3 map they are not shown on any zoomlevel.

The railway tunnels on my orgeon300 are on neither map visible on any zoomlevel, which might be a feature :wink: they are not that useful for navigating and would just clutter the screen.

In basecamp with the 11-3 generated map motorway_links are white with black edge and thick enough. And visible until 3km
in the 16-4 map they are only visible @ 200m and very thin.

… I made a mistake when I said the motorway links were visible on my gps(oregon300) with 16-4 map, they are not, only tiny lines at the 200m and below zoomlevel. The grey lines I mentioned before are from the 11-3 map.

Anyway I really appreciate what u guys are doing and happy to use the 11-3 map for quite a bit longer :wink: .

You are right that a lot has changed the last month and we’re still busy with the changes :wink:
As a result some bugs revealed but the next update should be better.

Update is running with Mkgmap r3200. It will take about 3 days before the maps become available. Hopefully the performance improvements will have an significant effect :slight_smile:

That might be good enough. I’m trying to get an idea of when changes I’ve made to OSM get included in these maps.

I wonder if it’s time to not have two routable versions (the standard and “new style”). As it stands, there isn’t any information to tell which one to use (or what the differences are).

Is there any plan to start producing the “Generic Nautical”? version?

I want to see if having a non-routable map disables the route calculation in certain Garmins (Touring and 810).

I currently think it’s best to evolve the original generic map into an non-routable light-weight map (for e.g. old Etrex and newer wrist Garmins).

A nautical map would be great but I haven’t had/taken the time to discover how the default nautical style works.

@dpawlyk:
Differences between generic and generic new style are at the moment not so big and mainly cosmetic.
Main difference is the use of a typ file, in order to render the properties of ways, like bridges, tunnels, pavement, road class of roudabouts etc.
Without a typ file (generic map, which uses the defaullt mkgmap style) this is not possible. The generic map does have an optional ‘mapnik’ typ file but this is only implemented in order to render some ugly garmin styles better (like the hatched forest patterns). For more info about the development of the new style see this topic: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=13257

That’s what I was looking for.

Brings back memories to the start of your Garmin maps with the “dense” grid over just NL. They were perfect for my Venture HC :sunglasses:

Lambertus, how about adding contour lines?
Popej has created some contour datasets that we can use (see your pm).

A contoured map would be especially appreciated by users such as in Australia where the only free alternative displaying contours at say 10 or 20m intervals is to create our own. I am just about to do that but srtm2osm needs windows whereas I only have a mac. :confused:
edit: srtm2osm runs fine on iMac under mono and have produced a fine set of contours now.