suggestions

This commit is contained in:
Motiejus Jakštys 2020-05-25 18:09:44 +03:00
parent 39bceb09aa
commit a12ceeb20e

View File

@ -182,20 +182,10 @@ retained.
\caption{{\DP} and {\VW} side-by-side visual comparison.} \caption{{\DP} and {\VW} side-by-side visual comparison.}
\end{figure} \end{figure}
\section{Algorithms based on cartographical knowledge} \section{Suggested alternative}
For further investigation:
\begin{itemize}
\item \cite{jiang2003line}
\item \cite{dyken2009simultaneous}
\item \cite{mustafa2006dynamic}
\item \cite{nollenburg2008morphing}
\end{itemize}
\section{My Idea}
\label{sec:my_idea} \label{sec:my_idea}
\section{Related Work} \section{Related Work and future suggestions}
\label{sec:related_work} \label{sec:related_work}
\cite{stanislawski2012automated} studied different types of metric assessments, \cite{stanislawski2012automated} studied different types of metric assessments,
@ -204,6 +194,10 @@ and tortuosity for the generalization of linear geographic elements. This
research can provide references to the appropriate settings of the line research can provide references to the appropriate settings of the line
generalization parameters for the maps at various scales. generalization parameters for the maps at various scales.
As noted in item~\ref{itm:2} on page~\pageref{itm:2}, it would be useful to
have a formula mapping {\DP} tolerance to {\VW}. That way, visual comparisons
between line simplification algorithms could be more objective.
\section{Conclusions and Further Work} \section{Conclusions and Further Work}
\label{sec:conclusions_and_further_work} \label{sec:conclusions_and_further_work}