On 2020-08-07 09:27, Christoph Hormann wrote:
>> I concur with a lot of your observations and like you i had essentially
>> given up on the idea of the coastline representing meaningful
>> information in the long term. But considering this is a very sad
>> conclusion which essentially means OpenStreetMap failing in its primary
>> goal in the single most fundamental mapping task of the planet, namely
>> the distinction between ocean and land, i am trying my best here to
>> work towards a consensus - no matter how slim the chances are from my
>> perspective.
The word "ocean" is already subjective... We need fundamentally to
distinguish between land, foreshore and water. These are objective there
should be not much argument, except for maybe which low/high water line
to use (mean springs or whatever). What the various areas are CALLED is
the subject here, and clearly one man's coastline is another man's
riverbank. But the fundamental pair of lines, creating the three zones
(land, foreshore and water) are required in any case.
By including a definition in OSM of the transition from river to
estuary, or from estuary to sea, we are actually "tagging for the
renderer" because we are removing the choice from the data consumer and
forcing a particular paradigm on the (OSM)-world. We have proven time
and time again that it is impossible to synthesise a compromise that
suits everyone - it just ends up suiting no-one.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
