On 08/09/18 19:21, Christoph Hormann wrote:
On Saturday 08 September 2018, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
The imagery I was working of had apparently been taken during the dry
season as the actual river channel with water in it was ~30 - 50 m's
wide. But the wet season river (or possibly flood?) channel was very
obviously ~500 - 700 m's wide.
What should we be marking as the "riverbank" - where the water is
visible "now", or the defined limits of where it spreads out to in
the wet season?
Note in many cases such situations are mapped based on the assumption of
armchair mappers that the floodplain of a braided river is fully water
covered at some time of the year - which is wrong in many cases.
Some rivers don't flow for many years.
When some do flow they can overflow the 'bank' for some kilometres width wise.
Most would map the sandy areas as the river bank ..
neglecting the larger areas where trees as misshapen and may still carry debris
carried by the water flows.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
