Re: [Talk-ca] Using Canvec data to recreate or modify coastline features
Thanks for the confirmation Daniel. Now I've got to go back over a rather large area to make sure it is all correct. On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 10:13:50PM -0400, Daniel Begin wrote: > Bonjour James, sorry for the delay. > > About your example, I couldn't have shown it better! > > The procedure I use ... > - All features having a natural=water tag are dissolved together before > creating a coastline feature. > > - The features having natural=water and water=intermittent tags are copied > into another layer before being reintegrated after the creation of the > coastline feature. > > Daniel > > -Original Message- > From: James A. Treacy [mailto:tre...@debian.org] > Sent: September-08-11 13:59 > To: Daniel Begin > Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Using Canvec data to recreate or modify coastline > features > > Daniel, > I'd like to make this more concrete with an example. If you have canvec data > that shows: > this area is land > -i-i-i-i-i-i-i-iway which is natural=water;water=intermittent > area with intermittent water > -w-i-w-i-w-i-w-iboundary with 2 ways. One is natural=water and > the other is natural=water;water=intermittent > this area is water > > is this what OSM should have? > this area is land > -c-i-c-i-c-i-c-iboundary with 2 ways. One is natural=coastline and > the other is natural=water;water=intermittent > area with intermittent water > -i-i-i-i-i-i-i-iway which is natural=water;water=intermittent > this area is water > > Obviously, the ways would be closed but I think this gives the idea. > > On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 09:37:11PM -0400, Daniel Begin wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Earlier today I was looking at coastline features modified to fit Canvec > > data and I found a problem with the "conversion". I think all of those who > > are converting coastline using Canvec data should be aware of the Canvec > > water data model... > > > > In Canvec data you will find two types of water polygons > (natural=water)... > > > > One type defines permanent water - an area that is always covered by the > > water. > > > > - It is tagged natural=water > > > > One type defines intermittent water - an area that is occasionally, but > not > > always covered with water. > > > > - It has two tags. One is the standard natural=water tag, the other is > > water=intermittent tag(1). > > > > > > > > The problem is that the coastline seems to be defined as the mean high > water > > level (MHWL) position(2). To create a coastline that meet the MHWL > position > > using Canvec, you must merge all natural=water polygon type before > > converting it to coastline. > > > > > > > > JOSM provides a good tool to merge those polygons - join overlapping area > > (Shift-J) > > > > > > > > > > > > Daniel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1 - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Water_cover > > > > 2 - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcoastline and other > > wiki discussions > > > > > ___ > > Talk-ca mailing list > > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca > > > -- > James (Jay) Treacy > tre...@debian.org -- James (Jay) Treacy tre...@debian.org ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] Using Canvec data to recreate or modify coastline features
Bonjour James, sorry for the delay.
About your example, I couldn't have shown it better!
The procedure I use ...
- All features having a natural=water tag are dissolved together before
creating a coastline feature.
- The features having natural=water and water=intermittent tags are copied
into another layer before being reintegrated after the creation of the
coastline feature.
Daniel
-Original Message-
From: James A. Treacy [mailto:tre...@debian.org]
Sent: September-08-11 13:59
To: Daniel Begin
Cc: talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] Using Canvec data to recreate or modify coastline
features
Daniel,
I'd like to make this more concrete with an example. If you have canvec data
that shows:
this area is land
-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-iway which is natural=water;water=intermittent
area with intermittent water
-w-i-w-i-w-i-w-iboundary with 2 ways. One is natural=water and
the other is natural=water;water=intermittent
this area is water
is this what OSM should have?
this area is land
-c-i-c-i-c-i-c-iboundary with 2 ways. One is natural=coastline and
the other is natural=water;water=intermittent
area with intermittent water
-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-iway which is natural=water;water=intermittent
this area is water
Obviously, the ways would be closed but I think this gives the idea.
On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 09:37:11PM -0400, Daniel Begin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Earlier today I was looking at coastline features modified to fit Canvec
> data and I found a problem with the "conversion". I think all of those who
> are converting coastline using Canvec data should be aware of the Canvec
> water data model...
>
> In Canvec data you will find two types of water polygons
(natural=water)...
>
> One type defines permanent water - an area that is always covered by the
> water.
>
> - It is tagged natural=water
>
> One type defines intermittent water - an area that is occasionally, but
not
> always covered with water.
>
> - It has two tags. One is the standard natural=water tag, the other is
> water=intermittent tag(1).
>
>
>
> The problem is that the coastline seems to be defined as the mean high
water
> level (MHWL) position(2). To create a coastline that meet the MHWL
position
> using Canvec, you must merge all natural=water polygon type before
> converting it to coastline.
>
>
>
> JOSM provides a good tool to merge those polygons - join overlapping area
> (Shift-J)
>
>
>
>
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 1 - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Water_cover
>
> 2 - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcoastline and other
> wiki discussions
>
> ___
> Talk-ca mailing list
> Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
--
James (Jay) Treacy
tre...@debian.org
___
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] What should a Canadian style map look like?
I agree with most of these suggestions. OSM should render in a manner familiar to Canadian map readers. Road colours should be limited to indicate primary/trunk and secondary/county roads (in practice, that should probably mean no distinction between highway=primary and highway=trunk -- like Matthew, I don't think green works well, especially in a heavily forested country). Road surface should be indicated. Add to that another: toll highways, which are usually indicated on North American maps. The question of long-distance northern roads is a question of information density. At low zooms, the Canadian map can seem pretty empty if we follow rules appropriate to higher density countries (Guten Tag, Deutschland). Is there a way of changing the rendering threshold for, say, towns so that empty parts of the map would have smaller centres rendered? Generally speaking, I find too much of interest disappears when you zoom out. Points of interest (historic, tourism) only really appear at the highest zoom levels, and that's less useful in places where the point of interest is outside the nearest town (e.g., the Royal Tyrrell Museum). As for rendering things like railways and trails, that hinges on the question of what the map is used for -- i.e., why people are using the map. No one map can cover everything at once: a road map makes a lousy cycling map, and so on. That's where layers come in. But it'll be hard to figure out what information is important without some idea of why people are using the map -- we're still in building mode at this point, I think, so the answer is still to come. -- Jonathan Crowe http://www.jonathancrowe.net ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
Re: [Talk-ca] What should a Canadian style map look like?
I think passenger railways like VIA rail, GO, AMT, etc should be rendered prominently. Most of the web maps are too auto-centric. How about the Trans Canada trail, National vs Provincial parks? I'm not a fan of roads rendered in green. Matthew Buchanan On 2011-09-12, at 3:32 PM, Richard Weait wrote: > Dear All, > > Just brain-storming, so let's have suggestions without debate for now. > What should the OSM data look like when styled for Canadians? Just > some quick ideas that appeal to me: > > - highway marker shields like 401, highway of heroes, Yellowhead, etc. > - fewer road colors. > - render cues about road surface so I can tell gravel roads. > - make long-distance roads in the north render somehow. > > What else? Big ideas, small ideas? > > Which points of interest should be more prominent? Hockey and curling > rinks? Trim this post and reply with your ideas. > > There is a similar thread starting on the talk-us list as well. > Perhaps we can all play together on our continent. > > ___ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
[Talk-ca] What should a Canadian style map look like?
Dear All, Just brain-storming, so let's have suggestions without debate for now. What should the OSM data look like when styled for Canadians? Just some quick ideas that appeal to me: - highway marker shields like 401, highway of heroes, Yellowhead, etc. - fewer road colors. - render cues about road surface so I can tell gravel roads. - make long-distance roads in the north render somehow. What else? Big ideas, small ideas? Which points of interest should be more prominent? Hockey and curling rinks? Trim this post and reply with your ideas. There is a similar thread starting on the talk-us list as well. Perhaps we can all play together on our continent. ___ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
