Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

Joachim Moskalewski · 2013-07-20 08:53:50

Ent wrote:

To get the best idea have a look at Mapnik and it will show huge areas being national reserves (parks in our speak).

I've seen this on the OSM website. I've done some efforts to get nature reserves shown on my hiking maps, but that results in most cases in less readable cards. The information "here is forest, there is wetland etc." is much more importand for hiking (unfortunately this isn't yet mapped in Tasmania). So the only way is to overlay that nature reserve area on the card like Mapnik does. But: On a Garmin device you don't have the big area in front of you as you have on a computer display, you already have more informations on a very limited display. Here in Germany overlaying such areas just with green letter "NR" is too much.

Ent wrote:

I am interested in why some tracks appear a little different on your rendering

That's because I do not have a style for a track, another for a path and so on. A path with "surface=fine_gravel" is a perfect way for hiking, while a track with "surface=grass" might be no fun on a rainy day. You'll find a short legend of the ways on the website of my main map:

http://www.gpxtour.com/en/page/getmap/

Ent wrote:

I was hoping that the mpgmap community could understand that apart from a the wonderful work being done on mkgmap without some sensible instructions optimized for the Windows users

I cannot help on windows. But is there really a difference? Path separators are different - that's it. And windows users are less used to work with a command line. But building a GUI for some map building tools like mkgmap would surely end up with a limited functionality - and the large amount of cards are built up via scripts automatically. And therefore batch files with comand line tools are simply perfect.

And yes, mkgmap & co isn't a tool for the average user. For those other people are making their cards available.

popej · 2013-07-20 10:29:34

Hi Brett,

this kind of forum works on principle: question - answer or problem - solution. You are trying to change it into: complain & request - work. This won't work. People respond because are interested in subject, not because they feel obliged. Since your main subject seems to be "these tools aren't good" I suggest you look at Mapwel:
http://www.mapwel.net/

This is complete GUI tool that should be able to perform all required tasks, from downloading OSM data up to loading img to GPS. I haven't used it, so I can't comment much, but it is very different approach than in case of mkgmap, so maybe you will find it comfortable.

Last edited by popej (2013-07-20 14:25:35)

Ent · 2013-07-21 03:06:43

ligfietser wrote:

oops...I deleted your post by accident Brett, I'm very sorry but I can't recover your post

Last edited by ligfietser (2013-07-21 09:00:53)

ligfietser · 2013-07-21 09:02:06

I wanted to reply Brett's first question, but I pressed 'edit' instead of 'quote'

Ent wrote:

Ok a simple question the, excellent http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl/ website provides a 2000.typ that attempts to mirror the mapnik. They provide the typ but as the style and the typ are effectively linked, so where will I find the style sheets they use, providing they make them available?

It's the default mkgmap style.

Here the links to the generic new styles and typ file

Ent · 2013-07-21 12:47:29

Hi ligfietser

Shame about the deletes post but moving on to the core issue.

Unless I following the wrong link the 2000.typ file is is 13kb and does not have the alpine_hut icon. The default style has tourism=alpine_hut [0x2b02 resolution 24] which is the standard Garmin bed icon.

The 2000.typ from garmin@openstreetmap.nl has the following

[_point]
Type=0x048
SubType=0x03
String1=0x04,Alpine hut
String2=0x01,Chalet
ExtendedLabels=N
DayXpm="16 16 19 2" Colormode=32
"!! c #000000" alpha=15
"!# c #0092DA" alpha=0
"!% c #0095DF" alpha=7
"!? c #008FDF" alpha=15
"!$ c #0099DD" alpha=0
"!* c #008EE3" alpha=6
"!= c #009FDF" alpha=7
"!1 c #0080BF" alpha=11
"!2 c #0099E6" alpha=5
"!3 c #0099CC" alpha=10
"!4 c #008FDA" alpha=6
"!5 c #00AAFF" alpha=12
"!6 c #0092DB" alpha=10
"!7 c #008FDA" alpha=15
"!8 c #00FFFF" alpha=14
"!9 c #0093DB" alpha=14
"#! c #0094DB" alpha=14
"## c #0097DC" alpha=5
"#% c #0080FF" alpha=13
"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!#!#!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
"!!!!!!!!!!!%!#!#!#!#!?!!!!!!!!!!"
"!!!!!!!$!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!*!!!!!!"
"!!!=!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!1!!"
"!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#!#"
"!$!#!#!#!!!!!!!!!#!!!!!!!#!#!#!2"
"!!!!!#!#!!!!!#!=!#!#!!!!!#!#!!!!"
"!!!!!#!#!!!#!#!#!#!!!!!!!#!#!!!!"
"!!!!!#!#!3!#!#!#!#!#!*!!!#!#!!!!"
"!!!!!#!#!3!#!#!#!#!#!#!!!#!#!!!!"
"!!!!!#!#!!!$!#!#!4!!!#!!!#!#!!!!"
"!!!!!#!#!!!$!#!#!#!5!#!!!#!#!!!!"
"!!!!!#!#!!!6!#!7!#!!!#!!!#!#!!!!"
"!!!!!#!#!!!#!#!8!#!!!#!!!#!#!!!!"
"!!!!!!!!!!!#!#!!!#!#!#!!!!!!!!!!"
"!!!!!!!!!!!9!1!!#!###%!!!!!!!!!!"
;1234567890123456
[end]

[end]

So if I modify the default style to
tourism=alpine_hut & name=* [0x4803 resolution 16]

from
tourism=alpine_hut [0x2b02 resolution 24]

the style sheet matches in with the typ sheet and I get the alpine_hut icon drawn on my GPS as per the icon used on mapnik.

If I use the mapnik.typ from http://code.google.com/p/mkgmap-style-sheets/ it is a a 31.9KB file and has the alpine_hut with the reference code
Type=0x048
SubType=0x03

Which translates to
[0x4803 resolution 16]
in the style file.

So unless I am reading the wrong file the mkgmap default style is not a match to either the 2000.typ file from garmin@openstreetmap.nl nor from http://code.google.com/p/mkgmap-style-sheets/. I could get access to their matching style sheet then I would have a match that should generate icons on the Garmin as per mapnik.

I hope you can see where I am coming from, so in summary

1. The default type and style file that comes with mkgmap zip file does not have the alpine_hut icon and instead links to the default Garmin icon being a bed.
2. I have two very good typ files that match mapnik icons but no matching style file.
3. I would be a lot faster and neater if I could get the style file that matches mapnik icons and not to mention make maps that OSM would see familiar icons for things like peaks and alpine_huts.
4. I have the skills to reverse engine the default style sheet to match if I have to but this would be unnecessary if I can find a style sheet that matches up with mapnik codes.

It would be great if lambertu...@gmail.com or a fellow developer would post their matching style file as they have done the hard work of drawing icons that match mapnik ones that appear in OSM home site.

Hope that the above is not too confusing:)

Cheers Brett

Last edited by Ent (2013-07-21 12:48:39)

ligfietser · 2013-07-21 13:26:40

Your observations are correct Brett, I copied the mapnik typ file from a french site: http://blog.lionelmaraval.fr/post/2010/ … our-Garmin
They have their own style files but I matched it with the default style and didnt care too much about the pois, so most of those are still referring to the default garmin ones (alpine huts for instance).
You can change the bed icon for the mapnik hut icon, just import them with typviewer from http://www.sjjb.co.uk/mapicons/contactsheet where you can find most of the mapnik icons.

Ent · 2013-07-22 03:16:03

Hi ligfietser

Thanks for the clarification and a starting point, and also thanks for working on this project as I assume that you are the same as wizardof...@gmail.com.

Is it possible to have the source style files in the download section as the browse option only allows a HTM file to be saved? Arh, I figured out that I can select and copy and paste to Notepad ++ the code. Clumsy but it will work.

Ok, now back to map creation and mapping.

One remaining question is the resolution levels. As mentioned in the deleted post I can change the line resolution levels to say 16 and highway=footway hangs in to 50km plus level which is a little high but it seems that I have choice between 8km or that. But if I select the same resolution levels for POI such as peaks they drop out past 8km. It could be that I am using mismatched style/typ so will be working form yours now on. I did read somewhere that you can set the number of levels in the img file but this impacts on img file size. Size of the img file is not an issue so I would like to have as much ability as possible to use fully the resolution levels. Any hints how to do this or are my assumptions on resolution levels incorrect.

The reason is peaks. In Tassie we have a high plateau of around 1000 metres so mountains below a 1000 metres can be dropped at say 5km level as they are generally not visible beyond that. The ones above 1400 metre are visible for tens of kilometres so they are the main navigation aids so can stay in up to 50km zoom as there are not enough in Tassie to create a screen clutter issue. The ones in between 1000 to 1400 metres could be set at 8km zoom levels as they are generally visible to that level. I am comfortable using the same logic for population centres and using the ele tag value to set up three icons resolution but if I can not get the peaks (POI) to show up above 8km I am defeated before I start.

Cheers

PS a rough test map I put up is getting favourable response but striking issues with only contours showing up with some model Garmins so I will change my cmd line as per your advice.

ligfietser · 2013-07-22 06:41:03

Glad to see you are making progress. The levels you can set in the options style file. Please note that the number of levels is limited, i think max 8.
About the pois, its Garmin who decides when to drop the rendering. Some types can be visible when you zoom all the way out, but most pois not, they disappear very soon. In basecamp its even worse. Pois that remain visible are the major city pois 0x01, 0x02 etc so maybe use them instead of the default garmin peaks poi. About your contours, what draw priority do u give them, still 1000? This doesnt make sense, 31 is the maximum draw priority.

Ent · 2013-07-22 07:46:16

Hi Ligfietser

Yes I will change the draw priority to 31 and try that. The cmd line number came from a fellow OSM Australia mapper. As an aside by using using Linux he has had an easier path as straight copy files and the run works unlike the subtle Unix Dos issues that frustrated me but in a way forced me to understand the files better. Not sure where he got the 1000 from though. I think probably someone thought make the number large enough to avoid any problem but I think that can result in a very confused Garmin.

Three people (me being one) have struck the problem of only contours appearing on the map and no other data, then done the disable, delete other img files, copy my img "process" then enable my img, and it works. Strangely when they re-copy the other img files back everything works well despite enabling and disabling the other img. It appears to be a random issue but probably the root cause is the 1000 number corrupting some hidden Garmin file.

I also have noticed a strange issue of my Garmin in the POI having peaks appearing twice. I as mentioned had brought and installed the Garmin Topo Maps, and due to them having mountains in wrong places and named incorrectly, I could identify the issue of the POI search picking them up despite the Garmin Top Map being disabled. Also routing would not work giving an error that the maps do not support routing in the area of my POI. But if on the Garmin when the map appeared if I moved the icon say to the hut, and selected it, then the routing worked. All very strange, as the Garmin appears to stored POI in some cache (not just the past ones used) and this gets confused when playing with multiple img files. I have a Garmin 62S and Rino 650 so trying to work out if it is Garmin model specific but so far the contour only appearing issue has come up on a, 62S, Rino 650 and Montana 600. My disable/delete img "solution" has worked on the 62S and Rino 650 but I have not heard back from the Montana user. The Vista user that uses a single gmapsupp.ing has not had an issue.

Thanks for the heads up on the POI resolution issue. Sounds like Garmin has decided to avoid screen clutter issue by forcing POI not to go above a certain level even if the user manually selects the zoom level. I will try the city icon level but get the feeling that will mean peaks will not appear in the geographic list on the Garmin. It will be a case of what trade-off annoys me the least. I have a few options and understanding that is not me but a Garmin issue and that has helped greatly.

It is amazing how people use the map I created. One user plugged in his Garmin and accessed the maps using Basecamp. This is a common trick to see the maps that Garmin preloads on a SD card. As aside if you copy the img file to a harddisk this does not work but copy it to a thumb drive and it does. The joys of copyright protection gone mad. Any way when he directly accessed the img file on the Garmin by using Basecamp the coastline and lakes did not come up. I mirrored his approach and found the same issue. I assume that if I use the make maps for Basecamp and install them the problem will go away? I have not tried creating Garmin Basecamp install files as there is only so much my brain can absorb in couple of days.

I will play with the level command once I figure it out. This could explain why www.cferrero.net style and typ create an img about sixty percent bigger than the default style and typ. His style is a bit too much "style" for me but he has some neat features with contour lines that I will like "borrow".

And thanks again for your help.

Cheers Brett

Last edited by Ent (2013-07-22 07:47:49)

ligfietser · 2013-07-22 08:16:29

When you switch to city pois for your peaks, the search will change too, Garmin thinks those peaks are cities.
If you want to make them findable in the geographic list as well, you can use the continue statement and use a transparent icon for the default peak poi.
natural=peak {name '${name|def:}${ele|height:m=>ft|def:}' } [0x02 resolution 14 continue]
natural=peak [0x6616 resolution 20]

Pois are listed even if the maps are turned off, you have to physically remove the map from the unit or rename it.

About the coastline and lakes did not come up, I dont know, maybe it has to do with the draw priority of those polygons in the typ file?

popej · 2013-07-22 14:46:49

Ent wrote:

Sounds like Garmin has decided to avoid screen clutter issue by forcing POI not to go above a certain level even if the user manually selects the zoom level.

Have you set zoom level for POI to 50km in GPS? There still be some declutter but POI should be visible, not only cities.

Ent · 2013-07-22 18:15:53

Hi ligfietser & popej

First so you will know what I am up to and the process that I am using. I decided to use the standard default styles as my base and use the full 32KB typ file from the French site. This means I have a bit of adding to do to the default style but at least everything works as it should. Also means that any changes are coming for a known clean base. Actually this works remarkably well except for a caravan or two appearing kilometres from the nearest road so I quickly fixed that. Even had a go at creating a typ for natural=scree, Um? TYPview is an impressive effort but without a help file it takes a while to figure things out. Still I am very glad it exists.

I had a good play with the combination of detail and zoom level for POI on my Garmin and also thought I would add another level but that resulted in my main highways disappearing and a slightly larger img. I attempted to use level instead of resolution to force the peaks to that level but then I found Steve's post confirming lighieter's statement that POI will remain fixed to a maximum level based on their category in Garmin land unless forced up by the POI zoom level. Frankly I can not figure out Garmin's logic with the POI zoom settings. I would have thought it might have forced every POI to be visible at the level you set. No that was not the case. Then I thought maybe is cut-off to stop POI appearing above a certain level. That appears to be the case but peaks still hit the hidden barrier imposed by Garmin. Both peaks and huts despite been level 16 an 18 appear up the to same zoom level then disappear together regardless of tghe zoom level so best stick to automatic. The detail level from "normal to most" acts as filter but still does not bring peaks up any level that must be set in the firmware.

So ligtitser your approach is the winner and I will now attempt to integrate it into the style sheet. Having maybe thirty peaks appearing in the city file is a minor issue compared to the benefit of seeing them. Sure I can force them with the GPS' POI level but then every peak is forced and Tassie goes the colour of mountains as the clutter takes over.

Looking at the actual maps generated the detail to clutter level is remarkably good after playing with a few resolution levels. Once I fix the mountains to cut out by elevation, lighten up the contour lines, and strengthen the line colour and or type for footways they will be near enough to what I had hoped for. Testing my inclusion of scrub and scree references plus dealing with tourism=wilderness_hut would deal with my outstanding wishes. But they will need data entered in OSM as nobody appears to use them probably because they do not render in mapnik/

The the test will be feed back from fellow bushwalkers. Then on to 4wd logic. Um? stiff drink and bed I think.

Cheers and thanks.

Ent · 2013-07-23 11:31:27

Hi All

Progress is been made with img appearing in the drop box https://www.dropbox.com/sh/g7nxh1xwjrlxg5v/O9sBszLB0n . It has been an interesting learning experience. Still need to implement the mountain logic fully.

As you are most likely aware that the is a lot of interlinking between all the aspects. One thing though that throw me for a while was the waterfalls were not coming up. Sure I struck the familiar 'include' command with the Unix switch in the points file plus did battle a bit incorporating the waterfall icon from another typ using TYPviewer. But the real show stopper was the actual OSM tagging. It had been tagged as tourist=attraction and water=waterfall. Sure we have the usual issue of waterway=waterfall as well but that was taken care of in the default style. But what was happening the parsing of the points file starts at the top and tourist=attraction came first. I am familiar with say tourist=attraction | waterway=waterfall option but is it possible have waterway=waterfall taking priority without putting it first in the order. What is the syntax for tourist=attraction | waterway <> waterfall. Is it the <> or some other character.

Also curious why the points and lines files are split with the include option in the default set. If there is sensible logic I will like to stick to so does anyone know the reason?

Thanks again Brett

Joachim Moskalewski · 2013-07-23 15:36:54

Ent wrote:

I am familiar with say tourist=attraction | waterway=waterfall option but is it possible have waterway=waterfall taking priority without putting it first in the order. What is the syntax for tourist=attraction | waterway <> waterfall.

tourism=attraction & waterway!=waterfall

This rule for attractions will let you define waterfalls later in your style.

You will find out that for hiking maps the default mkgmap style isn't a good start which you just have to adjust a little bit. After some weeks I started from zero again. You will find out that anyone handles the keys like "natural", "highway", "tourism" and so on separately one after another with every value; That looks tidy in the style files - but as you already found out the logical structure of what you want to see on the map may make more sense.

Change the order of your POIs in the style: The rule matches first catches the POI on the card. Reduces many "and", "or" and "if" in your style.

Ent · 2013-07-24 03:59:01

It was a bit of a challenge to understand the inter-raltionship between all the elements. It seems simple now that a style file takes OSM data and allocates a Garmin code to each set of tags. Then the style file adds custom icons to each Garmin code.

Also the style file appears to be parsed and once a tag gets some sort of match it is given the Garmin code or rejected. Hence, the continue command and my yet to understand continue with actions. All now simple concepts that mean I can build some very good maps for Garmins.

Interesting it was the splitting of style sheets that was big headache due to the path switch difference between unix and dos.

Typviewer is a powerful program but not intuitive. However, its ability to do things is top class.

Like notepad ++ as it is a proper programmer's editor.

But yes I agree probably wind up simplifying style to avoid the include command as this would at least simplify the unix/dos issue.

I have swapped over to JOSM as it recognize more tags but still misses some. Polatch 2 is rather in need of more tags added but I assume this is part political issue and volunteer time.

For JOSM is there a group I can contact re having tags added? By it certifying tags is a powerful means of "standardizing" tags. OSM Inspector is certainly a very good step in that direction.

Anyway much more work to do with the only issue being me understanding the structure better. As linked to a good img has been produced and I am awaiting more feedback from a bushwalking forum. It is worthwhile noting that despite many users having Garmin GPS units the actual use of them is quite small with many admitting they get confused and give up.

And thanks again for all the help.

Ent · 2013-07-25 15:16:53

The resulting img file is creating a bit of interest on a bushwalking forum and has lead to a few requests plus increased mapping activity. Most requests I can handled through the style and typ file editing but one I have no idea if it is possible using OSM tools. Is it possible to render the contours with shaded relief? And if so any pointers how to go about this? I have the SRTM contours successful incorporates as lines but is it possible to generate shading?

Cheers

popej · 2013-07-25 16:01:51

No 3-rd party program can create DEM data for Garmin maps. You would need original Garmin tools to make a map with shading.

There is possibility to make a map with pseudo shading but I doubt if this would be usable in GPS. The idea is described here:
http://cgpsmapper.com/download/Creating … 20data.pdf

Ent · 2013-07-26 01:44:56

Hi popej

Wow some great information and very skilful thinking. I think that the trade-off in map size will put paid to the idea plus the issue of dealing with elevations that go from 0-1600 metres in Tassie. For flatter areas, it might be the go. Bit worried by screen clutter issues as when is extra too much. Also, could run afoul of the draw levels given that you have contours, paths, bridge rendering, rivers, land features (scree, forest), land use (national reserve) so at least six draw priority levels are already taken from the allowed number. I am still getting my head around the draw level concept with a lot more experimenting required so my mentioned assumptions might be wrong on the draw levels issue. I will re-read and think further. Even if not used it adds to my understanding of tools and tricks to use.

And thanks for all the leads. I am still sorting out concepts and ideas but as they fall into place I am incorporating them into the maps but a long way behind using them all. I have “stolen” the idea of rendering bridges and put that into place on my test map before I send it out into the world. This concept might be good for dealing with unpaved roads. In Europe I would imagine that a trunk route is sealed and car suitable. But in Australia trunk routes can be unsealed and only suitable on for high clearance 2WD with some requiring a proper 4WD. Rather than duplicate line types the concept of using outer lines to represent road smoothness makes sense. Anyway, still working through that that idea.

The variable levels for mountains and icon type is working well keeping down screen clutter. I have not put in the trick to change the mountain style POI to city but still looking at the syntax to understand it. I like the idea once an icon appears it is easy to position the cursor over it and get the additional information that may not be displayed despite the name tag being used.

Interesting the routable feature and index is getting the thumbs up as you would have thought for hiking this would not have been so important.

Our local Parks and Widlife mapping officer has come on board and is releasing and putting up their track information.

And thanks again. It has been a challenge for me in the beginning but now I have basic tools working I am producing some good for bushwalking maps.

Cheers

Ent · 2013-07-27 07:45:39

Hi

A quick question on displaying on the Garmin lake names. I use the following in the water_polygon style file.

natural=water & name=* [0x3c resolution 17]

But the name is not rendered in either Basecamp nor on the Garmin. Is this a constraint on the Garmin logic or I have missed something? Any suggestions how to do this would be greatly appreciated as always.

Cheers

Joachim Moskalewski · 2013-07-27 09:15:35

Ent wrote:

I use the following in the water_polygon style file.
natural=water & name=* [0x3c resolution 17]
But the name is not rendered in either Basecamp nor on the Garmin.

I do not have Basecamp, but: Click on a polygon and you'll get the name of it. To get it visualized on the map you'll need a POI. The simple way is the "add-pois-to-areas" option of mkgmap. But to me that doesn't result in a reasonable map (far too much non making sense POIs). So you can go the hard way by adding POIs via the tools osmfilter and osmconvert with their options "keep" and "all-to-nodes" (or add a POI to OpenStreetMap...). At the moment I'm experimenting myself on this cases. My code currently doesn't work on any tagging cases... example:

# osmfilter / osmconvert cannot handle pbf files...
osmconvert map.osm.pbf --drop-version -o=pois.o5m
# here I can have a break while hiking - take look inside the files of any line to understand what's happening
osmfilter pois.o5m --keep="landuse=recreation_ground tourism=picnic_site" -o=tmp.osm
osmconvert tmp.osm --all-to-nodes -o=tmp2.osm
osmfilter tmp2.osm --keep="landuse=recreation_ground tourism=picnic_site" -o=break.osm
# repeat that for every tagging you want to have POIs, and afterwards merge it to the map:
osmconvert map.osm.pbf break.osm [...] -o=tmp3.osm
# clean up
rm -f pois.o5m tmp.osm tmp2.osm break.osm [...]
# our real data file is currently named tmp3.osm... maybe you want to rename it:
mv tmp3.osm map.osm

Ent · 2013-07-27 13:11:19

Hi

Thanks for the info. I thought I would initially take the easy way and already found that my cmd included the add-pois-to-areas as the below shows (note DOS bat file format)

java -Xmx8192m -Xms2048m -ea -jar mkgmap.jar --max-jobs=4 --gmapsupp --route --drive-on-left --check-roundabouts ^
--generate-sea --remove-ovm-work-files ^
   --add-pois-to-areas ^
   --location-autofill=nearest ^
   --index ^
   --style-file=styles\mapnik\ --description="Ent_World 20M Contours" ^
   --country-name=Australia --country-abbr=AU --region-name=Tasmania --region-abbr=TAS --draw-priority=25 tasmania.osm.pbf ^
   --family-name=contours --draw-priority=31 --transparent Tas_contours_20M\tasmania_lon*.osm.pbf ^
   styles\mapnik\mapnik_play.typ

This line also appears in the water_points file

natural=water & name=* [0x6603 resolution 17]

So I do not appear to be getting the names to appear on the most basic level for water.

But for scree I have in the landuse_polygons file

natural=scree [0x2f resolution 20 default_name 'Scree']

and that works a treat.

So what am I missing?

Cheers

popej · 2013-07-27 14:51:54

Visibility of labels is defined in TYP file. If you don't see lake name, it means that labels for this objects are disabled in TYP, by default they should be visible for object 3C.

Ent · 2013-07-27 15:36:58

Hi popej

Brilliant pick up. Trouble with "stealing" typ files is I have no idea what things have been changed from default and that was one of them. Thanks to your help and TYPviewer the issue has been quickly resolved. I am striking some varying location of the label in the lake but if I am correct that is due to the difficulty that mkgmaps has in working where the "center" is of erratically shaped polygons. If you can center them then that would be better still but it not too bad as it is.

Great help and much appreciated as this has overcome a source of frustration, especially on Basecamp.

Cheers Brett

popej · 2013-07-27 16:06:38

Polygons in BaseCamp or GPS have multiple labels paced all over whole area. They are visible even if you see only small part of polygon. If you prefer single label at defined point, you have to put it there manually.

Center of a polygon shape is not a precise definition. Most probably mkgmap calculate points for polygon as a center of gravity, which sometimes can be outside polygon area. Label in this case wouldn't look good.

Ent · 2013-08-01 10:03:22

Hi

I am looking to expand my data sources for contour lines and noticed the following website

http://www.opendem.info/download_contours.html

This gives access to 25m contour lines worldwide but when I downloaded the contour box the following files are found in directory (in one degree boxes)

S42E146.dbf
S42E146.prj
S42E146.shp
S42E146.shx

If I am correct these are shp files. Is there a reliable way to convert shp files to pbf? I have been trawling the web but getting rather confused as usual.

Also what is the best source of contour files mkgamp?

And do you need to match the OSM data box with the contour box?

Thanks as always.

PS I went through the setup of phyghtmap and received the following error. Is this still working or have I mucked something up in the install?

c:\Python27\Scripts>phyghtmap -a 143:-44:149:-39 -o Tasmania
no file for area S40E143 found on server.
no file for area S40E144 found on server.
no file for area S40E145 found on server.
no file for area S40E146 found on server.
no file for area S40E147 found on server.
no file for area S40E148 found on server.
no file for area S41E143 found on server.
no file for area S41E144 found on server.
no file for area S41E145 found on server.
no file for area S41E146 found on server.
no file for area S41E147 found on server.
no file for area S41E148 found on server.
no file for area S42E143 found on server.
no file for area S42E144 found on server.
no file for area S42E145 found on server.
no file for area S42E146 found on server.
no file for area S42E147 found on server.
no file for area S42E148 found on server.
no file for area S43E143 found on server.
no file for area S43E144 found on server.
no file for area S43E145 found on server.
no file for area S43E146 found on server.
no file for area S43E147 found on server.
no file for area S43E148 found on server.
no file for area S44E143 found on server.
no file for area S44E144 found on server.
no file for area S44E145 found on server.
no file for area S44E146 found on server.
no file for area S44E147 found on server.
no file for area S44E148 found on server.
No files for this area 143:-44:149:-39 from desired source.

Cheers

Last edited by Ent (2013-08-01 11:56:15)

Announcement

#26 2013-07-20 08:53:50

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#27 2013-07-20 10:29:34

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#28 2013-07-21 03:06:43

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#29 2013-07-21 09:02:06

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#30 2013-07-21 12:47:29

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#31 2013-07-21 13:26:40

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#32 2013-07-22 03:16:03

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#33 2013-07-22 06:41:03

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#34 2013-07-22 07:46:16

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#35 2013-07-22 08:16:29

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#36 2013-07-22 14:46:49

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#37 2013-07-22 18:15:53

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#38 2013-07-23 11:31:27

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#39 2013-07-23 15:36:54

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#40 2013-07-24 03:59:01

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#41 2013-07-25 15:16:53

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#42 2013-07-25 16:01:51

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#43 2013-07-26 01:44:56

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#44 2013-07-27 07:45:39

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#45 2013-07-27 09:15:35

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#46 2013-07-27 13:11:19

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#47 2013-07-27 14:51:54

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#48 2013-07-27 15:36:58

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#49 2013-07-27 16:06:38

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

#50 2013-08-01 10:03:22

Re: Where can I find an introduction to installing mkgmap hiking maps

Board footer