Linked to the PR #2180 that changed the way base_alti is handled, we noticed a difference in the representation of object in the 3D environnement.
Take the examples source_file_gpx_raster and source_file_gpx_3d that both use a gpx file to draw it on a itowns scene. The first one project it on the raster layer when the second one draw it as a mesh. We exept the 2 way to show very similar view.
Or (already before) that's not the case moreover the newly merge PR make it even more different (see example following)
Linked to the PR #2180 that changed the way base_alti is handled, we noticed a difference in the representation of object in the 3D environnement. Take the examples source_file_gpx_raster and source_file_gpx_3d that both use a gpx file to draw it on a itowns scene. The first one project it on the raster layer when the second one draw it as a mesh. We exept the 2 way to show very similar view. Or (already before) that's not the case moreover the newly merge PR make it even more different (see example following)
On master before merge: tilt: 45
tilt: 0 (Nadir)
![image](https://github.com/iTowns/itowns/assets/47628509/4bac496f-38bc-4863-967e-7401032f91fb)
On master after merge: tilt: 45
tilt: 0 (Nadir)
![image](https://github.com/iTowns/itowns/assets/47628509/6ec647b7-9d14-433b-963a-2e4defae1466)