MFM Polygon Standardization Discussion

Moderators: tympg, Moderators, Regional Mappers

User avatar
antyong (retired)
Site Admin (retired)
Posts: 1518
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 11:42 am
Location: Acquiring satellites....

Re: MFM polygon project

Postby antyong (retired) » Thu Oct 09, 2008 10:32 am

sabre23t wrote:
tympg wrote:
antyong wrote:My idea is to use colored polygons to represent the whole area. Detail building structures should be drawn with 0x13 builiding or other customised polygons.
- What about 0x10, is that a housing building or an area? (I'm thinking of some big houses along some of Penang's roads which are still occupied as residences).

Antyong defined "0x10 House" as "Entire Area" in the <<MFM Polygon Reference.xls>> spreadsheet. As I understand that ...
* if the house is a bungalow with a very big area having a small building within it, I can draw a 0x10 polygon covering the whole house compound/area, and draw a 0x13 polygon defining the actual smaller building within it
* if the house is a small garden bungalow where the building is not much smaller than the whole compound, I can just draw a 0x10 polygon covering the whole house compound area, and don't bother putting in a 0x13 polygon at all.
:-k

That's my idea. It is consistent with us drawing polygon blocks of a row of link houses instead of the individual build-up areas.

User avatar
antyong (retired)
Site Admin (retired)
Posts: 1518
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 11:42 am
Location: Acquiring satellites....

Re: MFM polygon project

Postby antyong (retired) » Thu Oct 09, 2008 10:44 am

tympg wrote:
antyong wrote:My idea is to use colored polygons to represent the whole area. Detail building structures should be drawn with 0x13 builiding or other customised polygons. Grey shades will be the color used for detail structures.


- What about 0x10, is that a housing building or an area? (I'm thinking of some big houses along some of Penang's roads which are still occupied as residences).

- Grey buildings against dark brown Gov't areas don't look nice. (See N5.42339 E100.30934) I was actually thinking of changing that one to something like N5.41178 E100.30714

- For medical facilities, I was also thinking of changing Adventist Hospital N5.43229 E100.30512 to look more like the Dental College N5.41924 E100.30847. But it seems like the former actually adheres to your standard.

- Since 0x11 and 0x12 defines compounds/areas they shouldn't be called "Residential Building" and "Government Building" respectively any more.

- Parking Garage is US English for multi-storey or covered car park. I'm already using it in some places (eg N5.35076 E100.30842). "Parking Lot" is US English for "open car park" that means parking at open ground, not in a building.

Thanks for reading my post. O:)

- No doubt the Dental College multi-colored polygons are more attractive to the eye. In other areas, we have not ventured into drawing detail building structures yet so maybe I don't recognize the benefit of using different polygon types for building structure. So now my question to everyone - can we not standardize and let the mapper draw according to what looks most attractive?

- We can easily change the default description once we have an understanding of its use

- IMHO we don't need 2 separate polygons for open and multi-storey car park.

User avatar
tympg
Senior Mapper
Posts: 1586
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:01 am
Location: Penang

Re: MFM polygon project

Postby tympg » Thu Oct 09, 2008 10:50 am

How would we redefine the following scenarios:

Government housing in a relatively leafy area:
20081009_tympg scotland rd.PNG


Terrace houses and an apartment tower within a condominium enclosure.
20081009_tympg scotland villas.png


It seems I'll have to rip out much of what I had been doing for some months now. I had spent weeks going down to the ground to observe the actual places and to countercheck what I had seen in Google. Now, I don't think I'm motivated at all to continue.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Garmin nüvi 2575R; Garmin eTrex Vista HCx; Android 5.0.1 Phone

User avatar
antyong (retired)
Site Admin (retired)
Posts: 1518
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 11:42 am
Location: Acquiring satellites....

Re: MFM polygon project

Postby antyong (retired) » Thu Oct 09, 2008 10:55 am

tympg wrote:How would we redefine the following scenarios:

Government housing in a relatively leafy area:
20081009_tympg scotland rd.PNG


Terrace houses and an apartment tower within a condominium enclosure.
20081009_tympg scotland villas.png


It seems I'll have to rip out much of what I had been doing for some months now. I had spent weeks going down to the ground to observe the actual places and to countercheck what I had seen in Google. Now, I don't think I'm motivated at all to continue.

Why not just continue what you do? Polygons are merely for us to add color and attractiveness to our maps. The need to standardize is not as strong as for polylines and POIs. I have to continue to come out with a reference guide for new mappers though.

User avatar
sabre23t
Moderator
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:59 pm
Location: Klang, Selangor (Nuvi2575R)
Contact:

Re: MFM polygon project

Postby sabre23t » Thu Oct 09, 2008 11:35 am

antyong wrote:The need to standardize is not as strong as for polylines and POIs. I have to continue to come out with a reference guide for new mappers though.

Agreed. I don't have any objection for Penang to continue with the standards that tympg set. Having said that I see that snapshot from tympg showing the limitation of the 3-4m accuracy of Garmin IMG format. I believe tympg accurately drew the bungalows below with proper right-angled sides in the MP file, but the cgpsmapper compilation slightly move the nodes due to the 3-4m accuracy limits of IMG format.
20081009_tympg scotland rd crop.png

So I'd suggest trying to draw polygons with sides of less than 5m long may not be the best use of our polygon mapping efforts. Concentrating on bigger polygons of "Entire Area" rather than smaller (<5m sides) polygons of "Detail Structure" per <<MFM Polygon Reference.xls>>, may be better use of our efforts in polygon-less MFM areas. O:)
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
4SQ, Waze, GMM, MSM, MFM & OSM ;-}

User avatar
tympg
Senior Mapper
Posts: 1586
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:01 am
Location: Penang

Re: MFM polygon project

Postby tympg » Thu Oct 09, 2008 3:00 pm

sabre23t wrote:Agreed. I don't have any objection for Penang to continue with the standards that tympg set. Having said that I see that snapshot from tympg showing the limitation of the 3-4m accuracy of Garmin IMG format. I believe tympg accurately drew the bungalows below with proper right-angled sides in the MP file, but the cgpsmapper compilation slightly move the nodes due to the 3-4m accuracy limits of IMG format.
So I'd suggest trying to draw polygons with sides of less than 5m long may not be the best use of our polygon mapping efforts. Concentrating on bigger polygons of "Entire Area" rather than smaller (<5m sides) polygons of "Detail Structure" per <<MFM Polygon Reference.xls>>, may be better use of our efforts in polygon-less MFM areas. O:)


antyong wrote:Why not just continue what you do? Polygons are merely for us to add color and attractiveness to our maps. The need to standardize is not as strong as for polylines and POIs. I have to continue to come out with a reference guide for new mappers though.


I'll try to adhere to the guidelines where I can, but converting existing stuff on the map will take some time. I guess it's just my need to fill details in empty space. I'm like one of those people in the Nokia 6210 TV ad, drawing map details, colouring in and just feeling good about it, except that I always have a need to go to the actual location to verify and re-check everything I've drawn. (I'm quite used to the stares of the security guards as I walk around the perimeter of their compound)

I know on the face of it, it doesn't make sense to spend so much time & effort putting in so much detail given the limitation of GPSMapper's & cgpsmapper's resolution and the less-than-satisfactory resulting polygons, as Sabre has pointed and as I myself have been so painfully aware since I started this last year. But better a distorted polygon there than empty space lah. :mrgreen:
Garmin nüvi 2575R; Garmin eTrex Vista HCx; Android 5.0.1 Phone

User avatar
tympg
Senior Mapper
Posts: 1586
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:01 am
Location: Penang

Re: MFM polygon project

Postby tympg » Thu Oct 09, 2008 3:04 pm

antyong wrote:- IMHO we don't need 2 separate polygons for open and multi-storey car park.

I agree, but they're already there as standard. Do you plan to recycle one of them for some other use?
Garmin nüvi 2575R; Garmin eTrex Vista HCx; Android 5.0.1 Phone

User avatar
pajero
Polygon Mapper
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:01 am
Location: Subang Jaya, Mal

Re: MFM polygon project

Postby pajero » Thu Oct 09, 2008 4:04 pm

:lol: :lol: :lol: don't la so stressed out...
Have fun with it... =P~

to add more confusion... i got a newbie question to ask...

in pic below, what should i do to the "trails" or "errosion"...
1. shld i just cover the whole area with State Park or...
2. shall i map the exposed part with "unpaved road" then blanket it over with Park?

emm...suggestions?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
tympg
Senior Mapper
Posts: 1586
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:01 am
Location: Penang

Re: MFM polygon project

Postby tympg » Thu Oct 09, 2008 5:03 pm

pajero wrote::lol: :lol: :lol: don't la so stressed out...
Have fun with it... =P~

to add more confusion... i got a newbie question to ask...

in pic below, what should i do to the "trails" or "errosion"...
1. shld i just cover the whole area with State Park or...
2. shall i map the exposed part with "unpaved road" then blanket it over with Park?

emm...suggestions?

#2 should be fine. Having a polyline through a polygon is quite common in our map

Of course you want to consider whether those lines are indeed used as unpaved roads. If they are just erosion lines, then probably best to ignore them.
Garmin nüvi 2575R; Garmin eTrex Vista HCx; Android 5.0.1 Phone

chinwy
Regional Mapper
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:04 pm
Location: Kuantan, Pahang

Custom polygons for vegetation

Postby chinwy » Sat Oct 11, 2008 4:41 pm

I hav attach a section of typical key found in Malaysian contour maps. From my experience in earlier working on them getting a full table of custom polygons be drawn up first before you start work is the NO 1 priority.

Otherwise it kind of get frustrating - not knowing if you want to add or omit it or come back later and then forgotten somewhow :fire: :fire:

Some additions I find useful additional polygons include breaking down the various cemetory ie Muslim, Chinese, Indian, etc. and Sandy patches as lots of our land are ex mining areas (in some states) and also sandy patches - it shows up well in Google.

If you can, do invest in some paper 5101 series maps from Jupem so that you can get more details put in ie river names. Only RM10/-. You have gone that far so taking the next setp and putting in the final details would be the final reward!!
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.


Return to “Mapping Guideline & Standards Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest