/It is a bay of the Tasman Sea/Pacific Ocean. Ecologically it is a fully />
maritime waterbody.
What do you mean by "maritime waterbody"?
A maritime waterbody are all those waters under the influence of the tides. You can
review article for natural=coastline. The coastline should be placed i
El 27/03/17 a las 16:48, Juan Pablo Tolosa Sanzana escribió:
>>/It is a bay of the Tasman Sea/Pacific Ocean. Ecologically it is a fully />
maritime waterbody.
>
> What do you mean by "maritime waterbody"?
A maritime waterbody are all those waters under the influe
robably the best solution here.
Note in general the esturary of Georges River would be considered to
start much further upstream, likely somewhere around here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/-33.9765/151.0237
at the transit from a meandering river to a ria
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ri
An exact limit between the open ocean and a sheltered coast is too
arbitrary as natural feature. It seems a political issue. You can use
boundary=maritime + border_type=baseline for excluding internal waters
from the open ocean, according of laws of the country. Check the article
https://en.wik
I don't know the Australian baseline, this is only an example. Sometimes
the countries define a straight baseline that close a bay. Of course,
Andrew have the freedoom to use, e.g. the tag description=* to do the
mentioned difference.
> No, it is not a political issue, the position of the base
By default baselines match with mean low water spring, meanwhile
natural=coastline is tagged at mean high water spring.
It would be good define some rules related to maritime boundaries don't
agree with UNCLOS, .e.g. peruvian boundary extends up 200 miles away the
coastline.
I didn't know about the practice of mapping the coastline along the baseline,
AFAIK we don't map the baseline, only their 12nm offset (maritime borders)
Vice versa, the practice is mapping the baseline along the coastline.
But I think this is no a good idea, because baseline extend up a bit
About King George Island, if I am not wrong, the normal people can not reach
the island from any ferry neither commercial flights from the rest of the
world. You can only reach the island using a cargo aircraft.
Inside the island you can not drive a motor vehicle, in the best case only can
walk
like a
private area.
De: Fernando Trebien
Enviado: viernes, 26 de abril de 2024 9:07
Para: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Asunto: Re: [Tagging] Highway classification in Antarctica
On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 at 03:16, Juan Pablo Tolosa Sanzana
wrote
I do not understand how is estimated a median point between unclassified and
tertiary values. Chilean community has shown opposition to upgrade from
unclassified to tertiary the access to Villa Las Estrellas/Frei base. The
Argentine community has not spoken in this mailing list, but those I have
: sábado, 27 de abril de 2024 20:02
Para: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Asunto: Re: [Tagging] Highway classification in Antarctica
On Sat, 27 Apr 2024 at 20:39, Juan Pablo Tolosa Sanzana
wrote:
> there is opposition to using tertiary in Argentine bases Marambio and
> Esperanza/
, Juan Pablo Tolosa Sanzana
wrote:
> I do not understand your petition
Put concretely:
1. Are Villa Las Estrellas, Bellingshausen Station, Great Wall Station
and Artigas Base considered settlements in OSM? Should they be
considered to have population=0?
2. If they are settlements, should they
It has no sense to inflating classifications of every island in the word for
being the most important road in respective island.
If a neighbor garage is more quieter than the mine is not a justification to
elevate road classification of one of them to compensate this difference.
The highway=* t
13 matches
Mail list logo