Maps: Great Wall Map Version 5

[Kim]

Originally Posted by Bryan

The kmz file should have a name with a date. The name of the node in the Google Earth "Places" tree could be named to match too if desired.

Files that are released to the public don't have version numbers, so that the new one will replace the old one, but the version number is contained in the setup (msi) file.



Yes, in the file name. Not in Google Earth.

Then the date as now should be enough.

[Luggi]

Why there are so much spaces in the Paths?
I mean, it would look nicer if there are solid paths and not scraps of lines.

An example you can find here:
http://f1videos4u.de/other/Pfad%20ohne%20Namen.kmz

In your Map there is a big gap at these placemark. But you can see the Wall (In other areas you can't) But if you can't see then you can guess where the deposit goes along. (You can colorize this parts into another color. e.g. blue or black)

[Bryan]

Originally Posted by Luggi

Why there are so much spaces in the Paths?
I mean, it would look nicer if there are solid paths and not scraps of lines.

An example you can find here:
http://f1videos4u.de/other/Pfad%20ohne%20Namen.kmz

In your Map there is a big gap at these placemark. But you can see the Wall (In other areas you can't) But if you can't see then you can guess where the deposit goes along. (You can colorize this parts into another color. e.g. blue or black)

Generally, our map shows where the Ming Dynasty Great Wall exists today, not where it once did or may have. We do not include guesswork on the map. There are many gaps where there never was a Great Wall and where as a result there are no deposits remaining today. Until we can verify these locations in person, they do not go into the map. We would rather miss a few places than show non-existent locations. If the appearance is lacking, well, so be it. It's accuracy we're after, not aesthetics.

Specifically, the location you point out here needs to be added to the map.

[Kim]

Originally Posted by Luggi

Why there are so much spaces in the Paths?
I mean, it would look nicer if there are solid paths and not scraps of lines.

An example you can find here:
http://f1videos4u.de/other/Pfad%20ohne%20Namen.kmz

In your Map there is a big gap at these placemark. But you can see the Wall (In other areas you can't) But if you can't see then you can guess where the deposit goes along. (You can colorize this parts into another color. e.g. blue or black)

We do not want to guess where the wall was or should be, that would greatly decrease the quality of the map if it was based on guessing.

Some of these unmarked areas was considered as a natural barrier either because they were too steep for any army to pass or too high to make it very unlikely that any army would pass here. So there were never a wall in some of these areas.

[chinoook]

Actually we do want to know where the wall once was. But to learn this is about impossible by map work.


-chinoook

[pmolsen]

You can save some space in the file (and a lot of typing) by deleting all the altitude values. In the Coordinates tag within KML the third value is altitude. It is set to 0 for all values in the data and defaults to the terrain height in Google Earth. It is optional and can be deleted altogether. See
http://code.google.com/apis/kml/docu...tml#linestring

Quote:
<coordinates> (required)
Two or more coordinate tuples, each consisting of floating point values for longitude, latitude, and altitude. The altitude component is optional. Insert a space between tuples. Do not include spaces within a tuple.

It is easy to update. Just edit the KML data in Wordpad and replace all ",0 " with " ".

I did it to the Beijing file and the KML file reduced by 15k in size.