Hello,
My problem at the moment is with the OGRE Web Client. It has shown unreliability for the past few days and I am trying to finish a project. It either gives me a message that the file cqannot be downloaded and converted or it displays an error page. Is anyone else having a similar issues? And if so is it becuase I am generalizing the shapefile in mapshaper.org before trying to convert it to JSON?
-Thanks, Mark
I want to simplify a shapefile of school districts in Texas that is very detailed. When I add in the un-generalized shapefile StatPlanet will display it, however when I generalize the shapefile StatPlanet will not visualize the map.
Hi,
If you used mapshaper, it for some reason modifies the map.dbf and it can become unusable. So you would need to remove (or not use) the mapshaper generated map.dbf and use the original one. I hope that was the issue - and that this resolves it. So you would add the original .dbf, and the simplified .shp, to a ZIP file - then upload it using the Ogre conversion tool.
Best,
Frank
Thanks, Frank. I will reach out to you if I have any further issues.
Hey Frank, still no luck even with the DBF modifications. I have been using the OGRE file converter with success on both county and city shapefiles today, so I am at a wall when it comes to this problem. I will keep trying though to figure it out.
Thanks again, Mark.
Hi Mark,
Sorry to hear you had no luck. If the issue is with simplification, have you tried QGIS to simplify it? Please see http://www.statsilk.com/maps/useful-free-gis-shapefile-map-tools (bottom of the page).
Best,
Frank
I have not tried QGIS, I am aware of the software but I usually do any simplification of polygons in ArcGIS or mapshaper. I will download QGIS and check it out though. Just out of curiosity, does a flash vs.cloud version have advantages or disadvantages when dealing with highly detailed shapefiles or is entirely related to the method of generalization and the modification of the dbf file?
Since the Cloud version uses GeoJSON, the file size of the maps tends to be a bit bigger compared to the shapefiles used by the Flash version (compressing these maps is an option which will be explored). But performance-wise, the cloud version should be a bit better, although performance would be a bit different depending on the browser (the Flash performance would be identifical across browsers).
Frank