Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil

2014-10-28 Thread Michael Kugelmann
On 26.10.2014 17:12, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: Please, try mapping bays as areas - not as nodes. but if you - for whatever reason ever - can't map it as area then it's better to map it as node instead not mapping it at all... Just an example: I did it some times ago with "something" (can't rem

Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil

2014-10-28 Thread Christoph Hormann
On Tuesday 28 October 2014, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: > > That's actually a very nice rendering. The channels in particular > seem to be oriented very naturally. But when I look at the underlying > osm data (nodes), it is much less clear how those features are > oriented. I feel like the rendering t

Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil

2014-10-28 Thread Christoph Hormann
On Tuesday 28 October 2014, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > > But are all bays 'mostly surrounded by land' or do some bays also > have very wide entrypoints (in addition to two pockets to trigger > this peninsula case)? And yes, I know it can always be solved by > drawing area manually if the algorithm won'

Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil

2014-10-28 Thread moltonel 3x Combo
On 28/10/2014, Richard Z. wrote: > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 11:18:43AM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> 2014-10-28 10:57 GMT+01:00 Richard Z. : >> >> The assumption is that a large bay will typically be more important than a >> smaller bay. For a good rendering you'd show only the more importan

Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil

2014-10-28 Thread moltonel 3x Combo
On 27/10/2014, Christoph Hormann wrote: > Since for label rendering you don't really need a polygon there is > little point in actually generating it in the first place. But i have > implemented and used techniques not unlike the algorithm described for > rendering bay and strait labels, like in

Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil

2014-10-28 Thread Ilpo Järvinen
On Tue, 28 Oct 2014, Christoph Hormann wrote: > On Tuesday 28 October 2014, Janko Mihelić wrote: > > > If you want to formulate a formal mathematical rule for where the > > > node for a bay is best placed: Place it so the variance of the > > > distance of the node to the bay's shores is minimized.

Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil

2014-10-28 Thread Richard Z.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 11:18:43AM +0100, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > 2014-10-28 10:57 GMT+01:00 Richard Z. : > > > Also, I am reading the arguments about estimating bay area so I am curious > > - when was the last time someone asked about bay area in square kilometers? > > I think it makes only

Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil

2014-10-28 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-10-28 10:57 GMT+01:00 Richard Z. : > Also, I am reading the arguments about estimating bay area so I am curious > - when was the last time someone asked about bay area in square kilometers? > I think it makes only sense in the context of territorial waters, fishing > or > mining rights etc. >

Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil

2014-10-28 Thread Richard Z.
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 04:28:53PM -0400, Eric Kidd wrote: > But the key point here is that none of these official sources represent > bays as polygons. GNIS uses a pointssomewhere in the bay. The nautical > charts print the name somewhere in the middle of the bay. Effectively, the > official data

Re: [Tagging] what does maxheight=none mean?

2014-10-28 Thread Martin Koppenhoefer
2014-10-27 20:21 GMT+01:00 Friedrich Volkmann : > But when > we see nothing, it's plain wrong to add something to the database. E.g. > when > there's no building, you wouldn't draw an area and tag it building=no. For > the same reason, you shouldn't make up a maxheight=none (or unsigned) when > th

Re: [Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil

2014-10-28 Thread Christoph Hormann
On Tuesday 28 October 2014, Janko Mihelić wrote: > > If you want to formulate a formal mathematical rule for where the > > node for a bay is best placed: Place it so the variance of the > > distance of the node to the bay's shores is minimized. Most > > existing nodes comply with this rule remarka

Re: [Tagging] RFC Bag shop

2014-10-28 Thread Ineiev
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 10:21:51AM +1100, Warin wrote: > > But English is not 'clean'. So I would say (in speach) 'a shop for > motorcycles' .. but 'a motorcyle shop' so plural then singular. Or'a shop for > alcohol' .. but 'an alcohol shop' so singular in both cases. Or 'a shop for > shoes' .. but