Re: [OSM-talk] California is all wet
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:22 PM, Daniel Sabo wrote: > The new river rendering at z7 to z10 is a little extreme. > e.g. > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.27&lon=-123.61&zoom=7&layers=M > http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.269&lon=-123.611&zoom=9&layers=M > > Are the lines supposed to be this thick? Some of is a data problem. Way too many creeks and streams are tagged as rivers. See this thread on talk-us about the data cleanup: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2011-March/005438.html Toby ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] California is all wet
The new river rendering at z7 to z10 is a little extreme. e.g. http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.27&lon=-123.61&zoom=7&layers=M http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=40.269&lon=-123.611&zoom=9&layers=M Are the lines supposed to be this thick? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] the coastline
to the list as well On 22 Mar 2011 16:58, "Kevin Peat" wrote: > > > On 22 Mar 2011 10:41, "David Groom" wrote:> > >> > >> Robin's point stands - should we mark the low water mark and the high > >> water mark and render the littoral zone differently? > >> I guess it is part of the micro-mapping initiative which is popular on > >> the tagging list. > > > > > > There is a proposal at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Water_cover for water = tidal, which defines the zone between low and high water > > I have used tidal=yes to mark the tidal parts of beaches, rivers, paths, etc. It has ~5000 uses per taginfo so I guess other people are using it as well. > > Kevin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Aruba has flooded
Thank you thank you thank you! I will silently wait and check if the flood dries... With humble respect, Milo 2011/3/22, Vladimir Vyskocil : > I also found a self intersection of the coastline and removed it. > > Vlad. > > On 22 mars 2011, at 05:49, Toby Murray wrote: > >> The wiki indicates that natural=coastline should only be used on ways. >> You seem to have removed it from the ways and added it to the Aruba >> island border relation. Being in Kansas, I can't claim to be an expert >> on coastlines so I'm not sure if the wiki is accurate or not but >> that's all I can see. >> >> Toby >> >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Milo van der Linden >> wrote: >>> Help... >>> >>> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=12.5315&lon=-69.9663&zoom=12&layers=M >>> >>> ___ >>> talk mailing list >>> talk@openstreetmap.org >>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >>> >> >> ___ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > -- Milo van der Linden Open Source Geospatial consultant do go digi - *Geospatial solutions* Beukenlaan 2 5261LE Vught +31616598808 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] the coastline
- Original Message - From: "Elizabeth Dodd" To: Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 10:19 PM Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] the coastline On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 21:59:20 - "Andy Robinson" wrote: I'd place the coastline at the low water mark because you know then that its always true. The coastline at the high water mark is only true a couple of times a day or whatever. Then it needs a high_water_mark way adding and ideally rendered in the long run. Cheers Andy -Original Message- From: Robin Paulson [mailto:robin.paul...@gmail.com] Sent: 21 March 2011 21:46 To: OSM Talk Subject: [OSM-talk] the coastline i've recently been doing some mapping around auckland, adding coastal walkways. one in particular i walked on sunday has two routes: one at the foot of the cliffs, one on the road at the top of the cliffs. the lower route is under water when the tide is in, so walkers are advised to follow the road route. so, i added the route, and it is now under water: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=-36.927322&lon=174.709115&zoom=18&layers=M this seems wrong, drawing a route which is then under water, but the alternative of moving the path is also wrong. so, what do we do? the question becomes (in my mind): why do we have a single way mapped 'coastline'? this implies the boundary between land and water is static, but of course it moves - a number of times per day. i like the possibility of a high water mark and a low water mark, used together to entirely replace the natural=coastline tag. perhaps some of you have some ideas around this also? thanks, -- the Coastline has been defined as high water mark. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcoastline I don't see that redefining it is going to be helpful + 1 Robin's point stands - should we mark the low water mark and the high water mark and render the littoral zone differently? I guess it is part of the micro-mapping initiative which is popular on the tagging list. There is a proposal at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Water_cover for water = tidal, which defines the zone between low and high water David From a safety point of view, I'd rather know that the path is under water. Then I can examine the coast and the tide tables (or ask) and make a decision on walking it. I certainly don't want a router taking me through there as the shortest or fastest walk. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Aruba has flooded
I also found a self intersection of the coastline and removed it. Vlad. On 22 mars 2011, at 05:49, Toby Murray wrote: > The wiki indicates that natural=coastline should only be used on ways. > You seem to have removed it from the ways and added it to the Aruba > island border relation. Being in Kansas, I can't claim to be an expert > on coastlines so I'm not sure if the wiki is accurate or not but > that's all I can see. > > Toby > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Milo van der Linden > wrote: >> Help... >> >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=12.5315&lon=-69.9663&zoom=12&layers=M >> >> ___ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] Aruba has flooded
I put back natural=coastline on the ways, I hope I didn't missed a part. Vlad. On 22 mars 2011, at 05:49, Toby Murray wrote: > The wiki indicates that natural=coastline should only be used on ways. > You seem to have removed it from the ways and added it to the Aruba > island border relation. Being in Kansas, I can't claim to be an expert > on coastlines so I'm not sure if the wiki is accurate or not but > that's all I can see. > > Toby > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Milo van der Linden > wrote: >> Help... >> >> http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=12.5315&lon=-69.9663&zoom=12&layers=M >> >> ___ >> talk mailing list >> talk@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk >> > > ___ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
