Re: [Talk-ee] Administrative boundaries and coastlines

[Jaak Laineste]

> Is it possible to have Maa-amet municipality borders visible together with
their
> orthophotography through WMS?
> At some point I saw some configuration options in Merkaartor but I could
not
> get it working. So I'm still using JOSM...

You can use some free more powerful WMS client, e.g. Gaia or Quantum GIS
which enables to select list of layers. I see there same: borders are ending
with shoreline.
 


___
Talk-ee mailing list
Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee

Re: [Talk-ee] Administrative boundaries and coastlines

[Andre Grueneberg]

Joosep-Georg Järvemaa wrote:
> > How about (some special examples):
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=59.027&lon=22.7512&zoom=13&layers=B000FTF
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.202&lon=22.3945&zoom=12&layers=B000FTF
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.35&lon=24.5058&zoom=12&layers=B000FTF
> It does not look right to my eye.

What exactly do you mean?

> Is it possible to have Maa-amet municipality borders visible together
> with their orthophotography through WMS?

Well, you could take the OSM file from
, load
it into JOSM and open the Orthophoto WMS in the background.
Alternatively you could compare two WMS layers ... unfortunately JOSM or
WMSPlugin cannot add transparency to those layers ... 

Andre
-- 
This was a reminder of an unforgettable voice -- wossisname! you know?


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-ee mailing list
Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee

Re: [Talk-ee] Administrative boundaries and coastlines

[Joosep-Georg Järvemaa]

On 9 February 2010 00:01, Andre Grueneberg  wrote:
>
>> > I have now done so for admin_level=8 in Hiiu, Saare and Pärnu maakond.
>> > [I'll revert that if agreed here]
>
> How about (some special examples):
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=59.027&lon=22.7512&zoom=13&layers=B000FTF
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.202&lon=22.3945&zoom=12&layers=B000FTF
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.35&lon=24.5058&zoom=12&layers=B000FTF

It does not look right to my eye.


Is it possible to have Maa-amet municipality borders visible together
with their orthophotography through WMS?

At some point I saw some configuration options in Merkaartor but I
could not get it working. So I'm still using JOSM...



Regards,
-- 
Joosep-Georg Järvemaa

___
Talk-ee mailing list
Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee

Re: [Talk-ee] Administrative boundaries and coastlines

[Andre Grueneberg]

Jaak Laineste (Nutiteq) wrote:
> IMO the proper way to solve it would be to have Mapnik rendering
> fixed: if line is both city border and coastline, then it should not
> be rendered as border. This is how also paper maps are usually done.
> Can you add ticket to the mapnik trac, I think layout bugs are handled
> through it ?

And it seems there's already a ticket for it:
http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/2670

Okay ... I believe in the end your arguments are better. At least for
admin_level > 6 we should keep the coastline(s) in the relation.
I still prefer to have the county borders on the water.

> Well, just my assumption. Actually
> http://vana.narvaplan.ee/Linnakaart.pdf shows that the city border is
> in the middle of the river (like you suggest), but this could also be
> subjective view of the municipality. Or Maa-amet files are wrong.
> 
> By the way, http://www.narvaplan.ee/index.php?lang=et&menu=5&page=0
> has also Vector map of Narva (in terrible DGN and DWG formats, i.e.
> probably without attributes, but with buildings). Import?

Do we have a licence for that? At least everything says "© 2010 Narva LV
Arhitektuuri- ja Linnaplaneerimise Amet" ... so if you manage to
convince them that we may import it ... I'd consider this to be good
idea ... although this will be a mostly manual job.
 
> I wrote emails to Narva city and Võrtsjärve sihtasutus, lets see if
> they answer anything.

Okay...let's see, I'm really curious ...

Andre
-- 
Life. Too many questions damn few answers.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
Talk-ee mailing list
Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee

Re: [Talk-ee] Administrative boundaries and coastlines

[Jaak Laineste (Nutiteq)]

I can't comment all details, some general ideas. Maybe someone else
will step in?

> Jaak Laineste wrote:
>> > I have now done so for admin_level=8 in Hiiu, Saare and Pärnu maakond.
>> > [I'll revert that if agreed here]
>> How does it look like on Mapnik, can you give permalink where you have
>> defined it so?
>
> How about (some special examples):
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=59.027&lon=22.7512&zoom=13&layers=B000FTF
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.202&lon=22.3945&zoom=12&layers=B000FTF
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.35&lon=24.5058&zoom=12&layers=B000FTF
>
> And some counter example (only having coastline+relation membership with
> admin_level=8 -- not modified by me):
> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=58.9487&lon=23.5454&zoom=14&layers=B000FTF
> (Some islets having problems at the moment ... will fix that)

In visual rendering the arbitrary border in sea looks better option.
But technically (geoinformatically and legally) this is just
cartographic hack. Paper map makers have freedom to use a lot of
visual tricks, like drawing fake borders, they also move POIs (and
also roads, rivers etc - depending what is more important) to fake
locations to make them visible better. In digital databases like OSM
you cannot do it. Or if we really need to do it, then it must be
correspondingly tagged (fake border, fake location etc).

IMO the proper way to solve it would be to have Mapnik rendering
fixed: if line is both city border and coastline, then it should not
be rendered as border. This is how also paper maps are usually done.
Can you add ticket to the mapnik trac, I think layout bugs are handled
through it ?

>> If
>> Narva city municipal border (and their jurisdiction) ends with riverbank,
>> and there is some "federal land" before state/EU border then this should be
>> like that in the map also.
>
> Question: Is this the case or is it just some assumption?

Well, just my assumption. Actually
http://vana.narvaplan.ee/Linnakaart.pdf shows that the city border is
in the middle of the river (like you suggest), but this could also be
subjective view of the municipality. Or Maa-amet files are wrong.

By the way, http://www.narvaplan.ee/index.php?lang=et&menu=5&page=0
has also Vector map of Narva (in terrible DGN and DWG formats, i.e.
probably without attributes, but with buildings). Import?

>> Similar thing with Tallinn and Aegna island
>> (which is part of Tallinn, Central linnaosa); Naissaar is part of Viimsi
>> vald, so it is quite a mixture there if you try to divide sea between them
>> reasonably. I've seen that on some maps Võrtsjärv has been divided between
>> counties, but in Maaamet latest data has admin borders on shoreline.
>
> Actually about every map I have seen contains the border(s) in
> Võrtsjärv.

Yes, it is common on paper maps. It does not mean it is really
correct. Maaamet's http://xgis.maaamet.ee/xGIS/XGis does not have any
admin boders on Võrtsjärv, Peipsi, Sea and Narva River. It also does
not look like a cartographic accident, as on Emajõgi and smaller lakes
there are admin borders shown. Either: Maaamet knows that this is
right or they just avoid the issue of vaguely defined (undefined)
border areas.

I wrote emails to Narva city and Võrtsjärve sihtasutus, lets see if
they answer anything.


ps. We have the final expert questions from KYSK for our project, and
deadline until 11.02 to answer them.

Jaak

___
Talk-ee mailing list
Talk-ee@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ee