On Tuesday 04 August 2020, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> Christoph, I guess it could be seen from looking at the email headers
> or when reading in a threaded view, but for the convenience of
> everybody I’d ask you to add a bit of context to your contributions
> here (in particular to whom you reply)
Sorry - i sometimes forget that there are people who seriously read
mailing lists in a non-threaded view.
That mail was in reply to muralito's detailed comments in reply to
Frederik:
> As with any terms in OSM context, we should'nt literaly translate the
> terms betwen languages because we can incurr in errors. Sometimes
> also between dialects of the same language the same word have
> different meanings. In this case, "coastline" should'nt be translated
> to spanish as "costa". Acording to RAE.es (official institution for
> the spanish language), it defines "costa" as "Orilla del mar, de un
> río, de un lago, etc., y tierra que está cerca de ella". Translated,
> in spanish "costa" does not mean only seashore ("Orilla de mar"), it
> could be a river bank ("Orilla de río"), lake shore ("Orilla de
> lago". So that any city or comunity defines itself as "costa" or
> "costera", or "SHORE" or any other term, is not related to the OSM
> coastline definition. It is also different from the definition of
> "coast" from Oxford Dictionary (6th edition that i have in hand),
> which refers to the land besides the ocean or the sea.
>
> In some cases, like this, the wikipedia article lacks the accuracy to
> define river. The river starts in Paralelo Hito Punta Gorda and ends
> in the line between Punta del Este and Punta Rasa.
>
> Here in Uruguay we have two "coast", the oceanic coast
> (natural=coastline) which begins in Punta del Este and goes to the
> border with Brazil. The other "coast" is the river, which is why
> Montevideo, Buenos Aires, etc, are known as "ciudad ribereña"
> (riverside city). The oceanic coast in the Argentina side, also
> starts in Punta Rasa. Those two different coast are very different
> All this facts are clearly visible and verifiable being here. Just
> like other thing they are not visible in aerial imagery [3].
>
> The motivation to not map as coastline are not political, but
> technical. The political issues were solved at least 60 years ago,
> with scientific consensus. [1][2] There is no other place where the
> coastline could be placed. There has been, and there is wide
> consensus in both local communities (i cannot say absolute consensus
> without checking). The limit of Rio de la Plata is historically
> recognized by politics and scientists. The legal, or official
> definition is settled at least 60 years ago, by political means
> (binational protocols, UN international treaty, IHO definitions), y
> scientific studies. Also newer/modern scientific studies and papers,
> based on salinity, batimetry, water flows, sediments, mathematical
> models, etc. confirms what the old scientific studies and political
> have agreed that the limit of the ocean is between Punta del Este and
> Punta Rasa, so there should be no discussion here. Besides this, in
> 2016 the UN extended the sovereignty rights of Uruguay in the
> continental platform for 350 nautical miles [11], but this is another
> issue and is not mapped yet. And speaking about politics, both navies
> pursues industrial fishing pirates, mostly from Asia.
>
> This is just a very width river, with a basin size like India, or 10
> times Germany, it obviously brings a very large amount o fresh water,
> which influences the salinity of the ocean waters several tenths of
> km inner into the ocean from Punta Rasa or Punta del Este.
>
> According to some people, mapping the coastline where I think where
> it should be, and where it was since the river was mapped at least 6
> years ago, that kind of mapping, maybe some renders create artifacts
> because they consider this as inner water and not ocean. I see no
> problem in that, because in the aerial photo [3] the colour of the
> river is like any other river, and not like an ocean. For example, i
> linked two videos showing the clearly the difference between Rio de
> la Plata and Atlantic Ocean [9][10]
>
> If you choose to map this riverbank as coastline, is just mapping for
> convenience (for convenience of the renderer), to see the world map
> as you prefer to see it, but it is not modelling the world as it is.
>
> By the way, the problem in january 2020 with the rendering toolchain
> fails were not caused for moving the coastline to the ocean/river
> limit, as it was there for several years, but were caused by a
> changeset which changed the tagging of the riverbank as coastline.
--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
