Paul,

About duplicated waterbody & coastline ways east of Westham Island:
It is the result of a complex case, where a combination of 3 "waterbody types" 
(Channel, River, Ocean) and 3 "water permanency" types (Permanent, 
Intermittent, Unknown) are touching each other around a coastal Island. That is 
a natural oddity !-) 

I haven't foreseen such a combination in transforming the Canvec waterbody 
definition into something that matches Osm definition. The process has been 
changed and the data will be corrected soon.

About missing Delta-Richmond border:
Boundaries are published when available. They are usually provided by the 
Provinces. As there is no agreement yet, with the BC government, there is no 
Delta-Richmond border to search for.

About the missing metadata.txt file:
On Friday, 2012-04-20 17:37 I wrote: "I will soon include metadata generation 
in the conversion process". "Soon" did not mean that soon !-) 

I will probably provide them in the following weeks, while reprocessing the 
files to eliminate waterbody & coastline potentially duplicated ways, like the 
case you just raised.

Daniel

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com] 
Sent: April 25, 2012 05:23
To: Bégin, Daniel
Subject: Oddities in 092G03

I was looking at 092G03.3.1.osm and found a couple of oddities

The first is that there is no way for the Delta-Richmond border. This 
approximately runs down the South arm of the Fraser.

The second is that for the largish island just SE of the middle the east coast 
of it has both a natural=coastline and a natural=water way. The choice between 
what is part of the ocean and marked by coastline vs. what is part of the river 
and marked by a closed way or multipolygon is fairly arbitrary but it's 
duplicated here.

Also, was there supposed to be a text file indicating the age of the features 
in the zip file? I didn't find one

Paul


_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Reply via email to