Worldwide routable Garmin maps: Missing/incorrect feature requests

I need a list of poi codes that are likely to be searchable by most GPS. Working on the above issue I’ve come unstuck, as toilets and tourist info are searchable in MS, but not on my Zumo. The cgpsmapper manual wasn’t useful…

I think you can find more info on that in the mkgmap archives. I think Charlie Ferrero has done some research, maybe you can find more on his website: http://www.cferrero.net/maps/mkgmap_tiddlywiki.html

Whether a feature is searchable or not also depends on the GPS model. Also the display varies, sometimes you get a toilet symbol, sometimes a ? sometimes an i for tourist info. By using a default typ file we can eliminate those Garmin issues.

Edit:
Maybe this can help you further http://www.cferrero.net/maps/downloads/garmin_feature_list.xls

Thanks for the link to that spreadsheet.

Issue 9 is fixed. No more guide posts. Toilets and tourist offices are now searchable, at least in MS and on my Zumo.

I had to create a typ file for that. Minko, before you start on your typ file please grab mine from the svn repository.

Cheers,
Peter.

Issue 1 fixed.

Issues 3 & 6-9 are also fixed. There is only one important fix left, issue 2: splitting some minor ways that all get rendered as alley. We have made significant progress on that one, too, but my Zumo doesn’t show all of those lines. We may end up leaving it at that… Let’s see what other tricks Minko comes up with.

Lambertus, you may want to have a go at testing some of what we have done so far, just so that there are no hidden show-stoppers.

The mapnik typ in its current form will not be totally compatible with the new definitions, but the default typ is almost required now.

Cheers,
Peter.

Thanks Peter!

I will setup another map tile generation toolchain. This will take a while before you will see a first result though…

I’m a bit overloaded with stuff right now. Lots of changes, things to check and decisions to be taken. Only a few hours per day to work with. So I cannot provide a target date to release the first version.

Please don’t hurry, we still have to work out the last issues and in the mean time I can adjust the Mapnik.typ file to match with the modified style files.
I copied the mapnik typ file and also the openfietsmap lite styles and typ to the trunk. I named the typ file 20011.typ but maybe ofm_lite.typ is better since people will probably change the Family ID’s to install more copies. The name openfietsmap_lite.typ is definitely too long for Mapsource and will cause crashes.

I have created a test map with the new styles and default typ file. In this map the sea is now rendered and the background is solid white.
Buildings are only rendered in the highest detail level so they won’t clutter the map. Some lines still needs some finetuning (footpaths, track roads).

The map can be downloaded here: http://code.google.com/p/mkgmap-style-sheets/downloads/list

Licensing: I didn’t give much thought to this and it’s not important to me, but when I set up this little project on google code I was told to choose a licence. I chose ODBL, but on reflection this is not really sensible. What licence should this stuff be under? mkgmap itself uses GPL version 2.

Licenses don’t have my interest, but I think the one thing you should ask yourself is: what do you want to accomplish with a license?

Do you want to enforce a license if someone just grabs the stylesheets and does whatever they want to do with it?
If you don’t mind, just release it as public domain.
If you want to have your name preserved in the files take a very light license like MIT or BSD
If you want to enforce any party that uses the stylesheets to open their version of the stylesheet too, then use GPL for Mkgmap compatibility

Don’t know much about licenses too but GPL sounds good.
I have finetuned the paths, pedestrian roads and tracks too and updated the test map

Here is a screenshot:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=52.3734&lon=4.5381&zoom=14&layers=M

GPL it is then. The map looks good. Are we all go then?

I will first need to test it an older Etrex to see if there are still issues. Maybe others can test it as well.
Here is a screnshot on a nüvi:

Edit: gmapsupp.img added in the download section for testing
http://code.google.com/p/mkgmap-style-sheets/downloads/list

Looks good on my Zumo, except the long shield at the tunnel that I pointed out before. I think if you want the tunnel name displayed you should have a separate label for it. I suspect that the name is in the ref tag, but I haven’t checked it out.

Sorry I missed that one, can you send me a link from the osm.org map?
I noticed some long shield names too, but that is because mappers misused the ref tags on osm.

It’s here: http://osm.org/go/0E4@@QLXG- , but the ref tag is clean. In the img the label=~[0x4]S116 IJTUNNEL, which is probably correct. For some reason my Zumo tries to display all of that in one little box. In MS it’s correct, so I guess it’s yet another firmware bug that Garmin won’t fix.

The IJ-tunnel looks fine without shields on the Nuvi and Dakota. So maybe it is a Zumo bug.

Awesome work guys!

Ligfietser, I’m still slowly -as time permits- working through the test map (and POI list) you sent me some time ago and making notes. Should I continue or does this new test map make that work superfluous?

In the latest test map releases the polygons are rendered better, and maybe some lines too so I should switch to the newer version…
But your old notes can be still usefull.

Here’s some shots from a GPS Map 76 CSx using your test map:



Given the small palette on this GPS, there’s a lack of contrast which is more clear on the unit than it is on these screenshots, but overall this looks like a good job.