I use a node for most. Only if there is a distinct clearing in the middle of nowhere or a marked helipad then I use an area.
On 11 January 2020 8:56:01 pm AEDT, Andrew Harvey <andrew.harv...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 17:56, Graeme Fitzpatrick ><graemefi...@gmail.com> >wrote: > >> Question re this Map Roulette task, thanks. >> >> I take it these details have come from a NPWS list of some form that >says >> there is a landing site at "this" spot. >> > >Yes that's right. > > >> So, even if it shows as just a patch of bare ground, we tag it as a >> landing site? >> > >This dataset is saying that the patch of bare ground is a landing site, >either an emergency one or actual helipad. Remember we're not just >mapping >any available patch of bare ground as an emergency landing site, only >those >which NPWS have designated as emergency landing sites. > > >> >> Node or area? >> > >Up to you both are fine, but unless there is some kind of boundary you >can >see I'd just go with a node. > > >> >> Of the few I've looked at, one was a very discernible flattened out >square >> of dirt which I tagged as an area, another was just a clearing in the >> forest so I put a node there, while the third was just a spot in an >open >> paddock. >> >> & it would appear that emergency=landing_site doesn't render in any >way - >> does that matter? >> > >That's okay, typically something only starts getting rendered by maps >and >apps once it has some usage, so actually mapping it helps justify >getting >it into maps and apps.
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
