Any reason why these seem to have disappeared or is it just an incorrect edit?
If it's just a mistake I'll add Rydal Water back later, whether I have the time
to do Windermere is another matter though unfortunately...
Thanks,
Nick
___
Talk-GB mailing
What do you think is wrong with them?
They're visible in mapnik, most ways haven't been edited since
January. There does appear to be a bit of pointless overuse of
multipolygons to represent riverbanks, but nothing that makes them
'missing'.
Dave F.
1. Didn't appear on Freemap when I updated the data earlier today (first update
since the 64-bit ID issue in Feb)
2. Went onto Potlatch and the natural=water polygon seemed to be missing in
both cases.
Other lakes in the Lake District all ok.
-Dave F. dave...@madasafish.com wrote: -
On 24/03/2013 11:38, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
1. Didn't appear on Freemap when I updated the data earlier today
(first update since the 64-bit ID issue in Feb)
Well, to be honest, there's your problem. Freemap, to me, is a bit of a
joke.
2. Went onto Potlatch and the natural=water polygon
To reply to your points:
1. Firstly I don't think I have ever responded in a rant style fashion on the
OSM mailing lists before, but could you please qualify your insulting first
comment? Are you simply a troll, are are you simply so pathetic and
small-minded not to realise that a) Freemap
The problem seemed to be that the boundary of Rydal Water had been split
into 3 parts which, although they were assigned to the Rydal Water
relation, had no tags of their own. Potlatch was not identifying the
area as water.
I have joined them up, and given them the natural=water tag. Potlatch
Thanks for that.
Windermere is still problematic but I haven't done a lot of work with
multipolygons so I'll let someone with more experience sort it out.
Nick
-Roger Calvert ro...@rogercalvert.me.uk wrote: -
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
From: Roger Calvert ro...@rogercalvert.me.uk
On 24/03/2013 13:13, Roger Calvert wrote:
The problem seemed to be that the boundary of Rydal Water had been
split into 3 parts which, although they were assigned to the Rydal
Water relation, had no tags of their own. Potlatch was not identifying
the area as water.
I have joined them up, and
The NP areas do have some kind of individual raison d'etre because
the parish/town council areas are only used as a starting point. They
can exclude parts of their area if they wish, and by agreement with
adjoining authorities, include additional areas from neighbouring
parishes where that
Dave F,
Please read the link on multipolygons:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multipolygon
Thanks for this link - there is always something to learn!
By making your edits you now incorrectly made Rydal Water a part of
the River Rothay multi-polygon.
Oops - I should have picked that
On 24/03/2013 12:46, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
To reply to your points:
1. Firstly I don't think I have ever responded in a rant style
fashion on the OSM mailing lists before, but could you please qualify
your insulting first comment? Are you simply a troll, are are you
simply so pathetic and
11 matches
Mail list logo
