Ibycus Topo 5.0?

[+ibycus]

Been a while since I released a new version. I'm starting work on version 5.0, and wanted to get some feedback as far as things you might like to see (anything not in 4.0? Any little annoyances? etc). (Updated data is of course a given).

[MikeToCache]

Ok here is one to consider.

Water bodies, in particular large ones like the great lakes.

Using mapsource to view ibycus 4.0/3.2, they do not appear until you zoom to 5km. In vers 2.1 they were there at 100km level.

I can understand leaving out small water is a good idea, but is there a way to include large ones at higher zoom level, they make it easy to get oriented on a map.

 

Perhaps in a similar idea, when zoomed way you i see very large highway number markers, and no labels for large cities. Also seems to include some lines perhaps contours or drainages that are less useful at big zoom. Your 2.1 had some cities marked at these zooms and somewhat different lines - not sure these lines are really helpful.

 

Certainly no biggy but since you asked!

[+Viajero Perdido]

Perhaps merge the "old roads" layer into the main map, and tweak the old roads to not display when zoomed far out (at which point the whole screen fills up with red roads, most of which are very minor ones). If they were only visible when zoomed in, then I'd see no reason to not have them always displayed.

 

More minor roads, trails, cutlines, etc. would be awesome. (This is the main selling feature, to me, of your most expensive competition.) But something tells me there's a lot of work involved in collecting that extra data, so I'd totally understand if you don't tackle that one.

 

The 4.0 maps are awesome, by the way. Have I mentioned that before? Yeah probably.

[+Viajero Perdido]

PS, I applaud your earlier decision to leave out auto-routing, due to the hard work involved in getting it right. I think I know exactly what you mean by that, because the aforementioned [expensive competition] did include auto-routing, and those maps route badly in the presence of one-way or divided roads.

 

However... If the task of adding auto-routing to that level of quality is a simple matter of flipping a switch, maybe consider including it after all. We can always take it or leave it when sending maps to the unit, and a simple warning about the quality would suffice.

 

Auto-routing and back roads together would be an incredible combination.

[+Clem in the North]

Love the 4.0 version! Its the only version I have used but I think it is great.

[+Red90]

However... If the task of adding auto-routing to that level of quality is a simple matter of flipping a switch, maybe consider including it after all.

I believe the answer is it is not. If you apply automatic routing generation to the maps, it will result is a huge amount of errors that will prevent the maps from processing and these all need to be manually corrected.

 

I'm not sure I agree at all on the old roads. I find it quite rare that they are anywhere close to the correct locations.

 

One suggestion is to include a custom TYP with the package. I use one of my own on these maps that substantially lightens up the vegetation polygons making viewing much nicer on the high resolution devices.

[+sledhead1]

Digging up an old one here. Any update to a ver.5.0? My only complaint is old road data looks ugly on my montana 650. They don't look like trails they look like major highways.

[belgrath77]

Digging up an old one here. Any update to a ver.5.0? My only complaint is old road data looks ugly on my montana 650. They don't look like trails they look like major highways.

 

I also have the same question, any update on version 5.0 or a 4.x?

 

Regards,

Belg

[+teamkittens]

A bicycle focused variant like OpenFietsMap but with topo for Canada would be awesome.

[+Red90]

A bicycle focused variant like OpenFietsMap but with topo for Canada would be awesome.

 

That already exists. http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl/ Choose "routable bicycle" and you will get topo contours.

[belgrath77]

Digging up an old one here. Any update to a ver.5.0? My only complaint is old road data looks ugly on my montana 650. They don't look like trails they look like major highways.

 

I also have the same question, any update on version 5.0 or a 4.x?

 

Regards,

Belg

 

Has the process from original data source to final output ever been documented or written down? Is the process using open source tools etc? If so surely there is enough bodies and power in which to take up the torch with the project and produce a 5.0 or 4.x if others don't want carry on the project... just a thought