Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Troubles & Questions / Re: Tap on checkbox triggers scrolling instead
« Last post by Andrew Heard on Yesterday at 23:41:35 »
I had this same behavior with general track list. Annoying. I think it was improved in a recent beta because I hadn't had the issue since; but also haven't tried to reproduce it either. I haven't tried to check this behavior after long tap when multiple checkboxes are shown, but it does sound exactly the same.
2
Discussion/New features / Re: Update to mapsforge library 0.12.0
« Last post by Tobias on Yesterday at 20:38:15 »
Here's a screenshot.  There IS actually a white border around the text, but it's very very thin.  Notice the "101" text in the lower right corner?  Even at this larger-than-tablet magnification, it's very hard to tell there's any separator.
Thanks, I thought you had examples without white border and there would be a bug. As said above, the border is not scaled 150%, so it is too small for letters at his size, but OK for what is was meant.

Quote
Also, Locus beta 3.40.2.1 here is going nuts, drawing and redrawing the labels at two wildly different sizes.  Here I've caught a screenshot with both sizes shown at once.  Panning seems to trigger some re-rendering, and I had to pan a lot to line up things for the screenshot.
I can't reproduce this, but the really small ones are either wrong or, like in the screenshot with "4m" scale, are too much zoomed in. Until it's optimized for MF 0.12, street names are mainly optimized for zoom 16/17, where there was a chance to see them in previous versions. As street width scales with zoom, but the text size doesn't, the street names look tiny at ZL 22 in your example, but are actually just the same size as in ZL17. I don't think there's any sense in adding lots of code for optimizing for zoom levels that don't have a practical value ;-)
Quote
I have to disappear shortly from the internet for a few days, sorry.
Good for you :-)
3
Implementoval jsem TooSteepUphill do Tveho profilu ( a pridam do templaty 2.7, mozna az 2.8 )

Podstatné je,  že budeš muset experimentovat s parametry  níže, protože se to může a nekdy i bude bít s malými ale prudkými stoupáními vyskovych SRTM artefaktů.

Dole je výtah z parametrů, zkopirovany z prilozeneho profilu:

Například, pokud je použitý přílis nízky TooSteepPenaltybuffer  ( elevationpenaltybuffer ),
může profil preferovat cestu přes kopec, místo kolem řeky/zeleznice, protože u řeky/zeleznice jsou příkré artefakty, jak se SRTM ne a ne pořádne strefit do nadmořské výšky cesty.

Dole je link na ukázkový příklad  "Obrany to Bilovice at NE border of Brno, Czech Republic",
kde pokdu snizís parametr z 12 na 10 ( BRouter default je 5 ), tak Tě to požene přes kopec,
protože cesta podél řeky je  :příliš prudká".  Něco podobného může být v zástavbě.

Bude se muset zvolit kompromis mezi potlacenim artefaktu a nepotlačením realných, krátkých ale strmých stoupání.

Quote
# BEGIN  - Internal parareters for hills = 6 - experimental avoiding of too steep hills via strongly penalizing uphillcostfactor

# slope below this uphill limit ( % ) has no penalization

assign   TooSteepUphill         6.0 

# hilly penalization is done by uphillcostfactor and downhillcost, not by uphillcost.
# can be used optionally, but is rather overrun by the uphillcostfactor.

assign   TooSteepUphillCost     0.0

# Implemented as BRouter variable uphillcostfactor for uphill scope > TooSteepUphill + TooSteepbufferreduce                                     
# with the transient zone TooSteepUphill .. TooSteepUphill + TooSteepbufferreduce
# There is normal costfactor for  uphill scope <= TooSteepUphill
# and  costfactor = TooSteepCostFactor for uphill scope >= TooSteepUphill + TooSteepbufferreduce

assign   TooSteepCostFactor     200
                                 
# The width of the uphill scope transient zone                                       
assign   TooSteepbufferreduce   2.0

# Altitude buffer to catch steep SRTM artefacts
# It has to be high enough, otherwise it may suggest an over the hill route
# instead of a flat route along the river, with very steep SRTM artefacts,
# like the route From Obrany to Bilovice at NE border of Brno, Czech Republic
# if TooSteepPenaltybuffer  = only 10.0  ( BRouter default is 5.0 )
# http://brouter.de/brouter-web/#map=14/49.2412/16.6745/standard&lonlats=16.649287,49.227407;16.674995,49.245971

assign   TooSteepPenaltybuffer  12.0

# Altitude buffer for downhills, does not affect uphill penalization with zero uphillcost.
assign   TooSteepMaxbuffer      20.0

# END  - Internal parareters for hills = 6 - experimental avoiding of too steep hills via strongly penalizing uphillcostfactor
4
Discussion/New features / Re: Update to mapsforge library 0.12.0
« Last post by lor74cas on Yesterday at 07:13:15 »
Attached two screenshots. Not all street names are so unreadable this is one of the worst example.

Inviato dal mio SM-A520F utilizzando Tapatalk

5
Discussion/New features / Re: Update to mapsforge library 0.12.0
« Last post by Viajero Perdido on October 17, 2019, 23:21:33 »
Here's a screenshot.  There IS actually a white border around the text, but it's very very thin.  Notice the "101" text in the lower right corner?  Even at this larger-than-tablet magnification, it's very hard to tell there's any separator.

BTW, I held the tablet - from which I took the screenshot - up against the LCD monitor on which I'm viewing this post, and the attachment preview shown below is only barely smaller than the matching image on my tablet.  So that preview is a pretty good approximation of reality, though of course at lower resolution.  This is why I need 150% or more.

Also, Locus beta 3.40.2.1 here is going nuts, drawing and redrawing the labels at two wildly different sizes.  Here I've caught a screenshot with both sizes shown at once.  Panning seems to trigger some re-rendering, and I had to pan a lot to line up things for the screenshot.

This is using a recent OAM V4 map with your latest (I think) Elevate theme.  Thanks for looking into this.,

I have to disappear shortly from the internet for a few days, sorry.
6
Discussion/New features / Re: Update to mapsforge library 0.12.0
« Last post by Tobias on October 17, 2019, 22:47:47 »
BTW, I usually have my text size at 150%, which makes road names hit the borders of the road they're rendered inside/atop, black hitting black, which makes white borders around the letters a bit more desirable.
Could you post a screenshot where black is hitting black? There are white borders in Elevate around letters, so this shouldn't happen. It's probable that the borders aren't scaled as the text size in your 150% zoom option, but making borders thicker at 100% so that they look good at 150% isn't a solution.
7
Troubles & Questions / Tap on checkbox triggers scrolling instead
« Last post by twil69 on October 17, 2019, 20:55:22 »
I recently wanted to move some tracks from one folder into another one.
So I opened the original list of tracks, tapped the wrench icon to bring up the check boxes for selection.
Whenever I tried to tap a checkbox to select a list item the view jumped to some other tracks. After several attempts - that became more and more annoying - I noticed, that the tap accuracy seemed to be poor (or my fingers too fat) and the tap was recognized in the scrollbar area that is next to the checkboxes. Just as if you click with your mouse somewhere in the scroll bar region and the slider jumps there.
My track list is longer than one page, so scrolling is certainly needed. However, with the inaccuracy I observed selecting list items  is not reliable and you need to be veeeery precise to have the right action happen. Otherwise you have to start over and scroll to the region again for the next attempt. I resorted to long-tapping a list item, that will select it, too. For me it would be sufficient to scroll the list with repeated swipes. I dont need the scroll bars. At least not in the way they are implemented now: just a couple of pixels wide, which you barely can use in a meaningful way. And effectively the inaccuracy also renders the checkboxes useless. Then you could stay in the original list, long-press what you want to select and.... no, the copy, move and export actions are not available there, only in the selection view. And this is defunct  - at least for me.
But before complaining too much first a request for confirmation: did anyone else observe this problem?
8
Discussion/New features / Re: Update to mapsforge library 0.12.0
« Last post by Viajero Perdido on October 17, 2019, 16:53:43 »
I'm using OAM/Elevate, same as @lor74cas.  I had a hunch readability was at least partly a theme issue, at least as far as text size and white borders around the letters is concerned.

BTW, I usually have my text size at 150%, which makes road names hit the borders of the road they're rendered inside/atop, black hitting black, which makes white borders around the letters a bit more desirable.

Thanks John for the very fast update on your theme!  I'll check it out.
9
Discussion/New features / Re: Update to mapsforge library 0.12.0
« Last post by john_percy on October 17, 2019, 14:04:23 »
An updated version of the Voluntary theme is available for download in this forum: https://forum.locusmap.eu/index.php?topic=2915.msg19296#msg19296
10
Themes - Vector maps / Re: [Theme] Voluntary UK
« Last post by john_percy on October 17, 2019, 14:02:39 »
I've updated the themes in the first post to handle better the curved text for road names upcoming in Locus. Plus various other minor improvements and changes.

Edit: The non-Locus version I uploaded yesterday had not been fully updated. Now re-uploaded and available in the first post.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10