Ok, I checked the changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79201390
I doesn't look like the user who did the revert of the change was intending to edit-war, but was instead responding to the appearance of the Rio de la Plata being rendered as land on some map styles. This always happens for the first few hours up to a couple days after a change to the coastline, because the ocean shapefiles used to render the marine water environment are only updated once a day at most (and if the coastline is broken it will not update every day). I responded to the changeset to explain this. Keeping the river area while also moving the coastline will prevent this visual bug from occuring. - Joseph Eisenberg On 1/13/20, Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote: > It's fine for the area of the river (waterway=riverbank or > natural=water + water=river) to extend out to that line, but that's > the extreme limit of the estuary and it's part of the marine > environment. > > The coastline should extend up higher to where the flow of the river > is consistenly stronger than the tides and wind-driven currents. > > Was the mapper in changeset 79201390 deleting the river water area at > the same time? I think a good compromise would be to keep that area > too, which would allay the nationist concerns of local mappers that > their "world's widest river"(c) not be demoted. > > I hope the political reasons for these claims are not so strong for a > reasonable solution to be discussed. > > I've been meaning to make a proposal about estuaries in general. -It > would be nice to have a more consistent way to map them, both as > outside of the coastline but with a water area tagged with estuary=yes > or similar. I think I mentioned this a few months back but got busy > with other projects. > > - Joseph Eisenberg > > On 1/13/20, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> it appears that once again mappers are in diasgreement about how to map >> the Rio de la Plata, here >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=8/-35.154/-56.310 >> >> This is a disagreement that had already flared up three years ago, and >> is now coming back. >> >> According to Wikipedia, the International Hydrographic Organization >> defines the eastern boundary of the Río de la Plata as "a line joining >> Punta del Este, Uruguay and Cabo San Antonio, Argentina", which is what >> has been the case in OSM until now: >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/186710973 (the coastline across the >> "mouth" of the "river") >> >> and >> >> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3474227 (the "river") >> >> This current representation in OSM leads to a few strange situations >> especially in toolchains/map styles that use different colours for >> inland water and oceans, or that draw sea depths, or just highlight the >> coastline. Buenos Aires, according to OSM, is currently not a coastal >> city. >> >> One of the involved mappers who aligned the coastline more closely with >> the coast wrote (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79201390) "I >> believe this is inline with guidance >> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=coastline)". >> >> I'm not so clear about how to interpret the wiki page myself when it >> comes to river mouths. There's a clarifying proposal here >> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Features/Coastline-River_transit_placement >> but this is still at the proposal stage. >> >> Opinions? >> >> Bye >> Frederik >> >> -- >> Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
