Re: [Talk-us] Great Lakes Boundaries
Mike, Thanks for doing this! It sounds like a much bigger ordeal than I had originally thought. -- Jim On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: All, Since no objection to removing natural=water from the Lake Superior relation has been expressed, I have removed it. I also amended the note on the relation asking that it not be added back in. Mike On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 9:08 PM, David Fawcett david.fawc...@gmail.com wrote: Inland sea... On Apr 25, 2015, at 8:19 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Am 24.04.2015 um 17:23 schrieb AJ Ashton aj.ash...@gmail.com: Yes, if Lake Superior is mapped as natural=coastline (which I think is the easier-to-maintain approach for such a large complex water body) then we should remove natural=water from the multipolygon relation (r4039486). Does anyone have any objection to this? It's causing some noticeable rendering issues both in the standard style and for data consumers. yes, if the coastline tag remains it seems logical to remove the natural=water tag. Semantically the coastline tag on a freshwater lake is clearly wrong, but it seems to be an accepted compromise in this case: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcoastline#What_about_lakes.3F cheers Martin ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Great Lakes Boundaries
AJ, Thanks for your message and your interest in this topic. I have been reluctant to remove the natural=water tag from the relation (I am not the one that added it). I was worried that it might have widespread unintended consequences. However, given your and maxerickson's suggestion, I say we go ahead and do it. The rendering is very unpredictable the way things stand. The rendering may be fine early in the day, and then later, with no change to geometry or tagging, it is broken (e.g. islands flooded). Dirtying the tiles fixes the problem...until the next day. I also suggest we document this on the wiki, explicitly saying not to add the natural=water tag to the Great Lakes unless there is a discussion on these lists (thanks for including the Canadian list on your reply btw). Mike On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:23 AM, AJ Ashton aj.ash...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 11:22 PM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: User maxerickson sent me this comment directly about this issue: = The current modeling of the Great Lakes is actually to use natural=coastline. The addition of natural=water to the lake superior relation is probably what caused the bad rendering at z13. If you check the history of the relation, you can see people repeatedly adding and removing natural=water. = Yes, if Lake Superior is mapped as natural=coastline (which I think is the easier-to-maintain approach for such a large complex water body) then we should remove natural=water from the multipolygon relation (r4039486). Does anyone have any objection to this? It's causing some noticeable rendering issues both in the standard style and for data consumers. There is also a second multipolygon relation for Lake Superior that appears to be entirely redundant: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1120169 . It captures just the Canadian half of the lake. I think this relation could just be removed after going through it and confirming that all of its member ways are properly tagged as natural=coastline (which they appear to be). Does anyone have any reason to keep this relation? (cc'ing talk-ca) AJ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Great Lakes Boundaries
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 11:22 PM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: User maxerickson sent me this comment directly about this issue: = The current modeling of the Great Lakes is actually to use natural=coastline. The addition of natural=water to the lake superior relation is probably what caused the bad rendering at z13. If you check the history of the relation, you can see people repeatedly adding and removing natural=water. = Yes, if Lake Superior is mapped as natural=coastline (which I think is the easier-to-maintain approach for such a large complex water body) then we should remove natural=water from the multipolygon relation (r4039486). Does anyone have any objection to this? It's causing some noticeable rendering issues both in the standard style and for data consumers. There is also a second multipolygon relation for Lake Superior that appears to be entirely redundant: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1120169 . It captures just the Canadian half of the lake. I think this relation could just be removed after going through it and confirming that all of its member ways are properly tagged as natural=coastline (which they appear to be). Does anyone have any reason to keep this relation? (cc'ing talk-ca) AJ ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Great Lakes Boundaries
Jim, So far no tags have been changed, I only made sure that no natural=wetlands extended into Lake Superior from Isle Royale. I will work on the relation aspect later. Mike On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Jim McAndrew j...@loc8.us wrote: Mike, Thanks for looking into it! I'll look at how you changed the tags and maybe try fixing/breaking it myself! -- Jim On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: I assume that should be natural=verywetland, yes? Yes! - Good one! Jim, I fixed the wetlands that extended into Lake Superior. The problem you pointed out seems to have gone away. However, Above zoom level 12 Isle Royale is flooded by the lake. This is true of other islands within Lake Superior (the exact zoom level varies at which this happens from island to island). I suspect that to do this right would mean making all of these islands inner members of the Lake Superior multipolygon. I can work on this over the weekend... unless someone beats me to it. Mike ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Great Lakes Boundaries
Jim, Isle Royale should be rendering correctly at all zoom levels. I added the ways that make up the island to the Lake Superior multipolygon relation as inner members *and* removed the natural=coastline tag from those same ways. According to the wiki [1], this is the current method for mapping islands that are within inland bodies of water (as opposed to islands in the Ocean). There are lots of other islands to fix, including other small islands next to Isle Royale that I believe are part of the National Park. I do have a related question that I will post to the broader OSM-Talk list as it isn't US specific. Also, there are a lot of topological issues within Isle Royale to fix (some of the lakes *on the island* overlap wetlands). These don't seem to impact the rendering - other than the overlap looking bad. Mike [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Disland#Islands_in_waterways_and_lakes On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: Jim, So far no tags have been changed, I only made sure that no natural=wetlands extended into Lake Superior from Isle Royale. I will work on the relation aspect later. Mike On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Jim McAndrew j...@loc8.us wrote: Mike, Thanks for looking into it! I'll look at how you changed the tags and maybe try fixing/breaking it myself! -- Jim On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: I assume that should be natural=verywetland, yes? Yes! - Good one! Jim, I fixed the wetlands that extended into Lake Superior. The problem you pointed out seems to have gone away. However, Above zoom level 12 Isle Royale is flooded by the lake. This is true of other islands within Lake Superior (the exact zoom level varies at which this happens from island to island). I suspect that to do this right would mean making all of these islands inner members of the Lake Superior multipolygon. I can work on this over the weekend... unless someone beats me to it. Mike ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Great Lakes Boundaries
User maxerickson sent me this comment directly about this issue: = The current modeling of the Great Lakes is actually to use natural=coastline. The addition of natural=water to the lake superior relation is probably what caused the bad rendering at z13. If you check the history of the relation, you can see people repeatedly adding and removing natural=water. = On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: Jim, Isle Royale should be rendering correctly at all zoom levels. I added the ways that make up the island to the Lake Superior multipolygon relation as inner members *and* removed the natural=coastline tag from those same ways. According to the wiki [1], this is the current method for mapping islands that are within inland bodies of water (as opposed to islands in the Ocean). There are lots of other islands to fix, including other small islands next to Isle Royale that I believe are part of the National Park. I do have a related question that I will post to the broader OSM-Talk list as it isn't US specific. Also, there are a lot of topological issues within Isle Royale to fix (some of the lakes *on the island* overlap wetlands). These don't seem to impact the rendering - other than the overlap looking bad. Mike [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Disland#Islands_in_waterways_and_lakes On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: Jim, So far no tags have been changed, I only made sure that no natural=wetlands extended into Lake Superior from Isle Royale. I will work on the relation aspect later. Mike On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Jim McAndrew j...@loc8.us wrote: Mike, Thanks for looking into it! I'll look at how you changed the tags and maybe try fixing/breaking it myself! -- Jim On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: I assume that should be natural=verywetland, yes? Yes! - Good one! Jim, I fixed the wetlands that extended into Lake Superior. The problem you pointed out seems to have gone away. However, Above zoom level 12 Isle Royale is flooded by the lake. This is true of other islands within Lake Superior (the exact zoom level varies at which this happens from island to island). I suspect that to do this right would mean making all of these islands inner members of the Lake Superior multipolygon. I can work on this over the weekend... unless someone beats me to it. Mike ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Great Lakes Boundaries
Jim, Are you referring to how Isle Royale spills into Lake Superior? Might it be a broken relation rather than a tagging issue? Mike On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Jim McAndrew j...@loc8.us wrote: I've been noticing some weird tile issues around the Great Lakes. What is the best way to tag these islands so they render properly? http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/47.9399/-88.8770 I suppose the lake might be frozen right now, so maybe it is correct :). Thanks! -- Jim ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Great Lakes Boundaries
Mike, That's the issue! I know there's some weird stuff going on with the great lakes either being coastlines or giant lakes. I don't have any experience working on something that large in OSM. We are using OSM data for an NPS map, and Isle Royale is a NPS unit, so I'd like to try to get it to look as correct as possible. -- Jim On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: Jim, Are you referring to how Isle Royale spills into Lake Superior? Might it be a broken relation rather than a tagging issue? Mike On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Jim McAndrew j...@loc8.us wrote: I've been noticing some weird tile issues around the Great Lakes. What is the best way to tag these islands so they render properly? http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/47.9399/-88.8770 I suppose the lake might be frozen right now, so maybe it is correct :). Thanks! -- Jim ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Great Lakes Boundaries
Jim, It seems to be missing a natural=coastline tag. I assuming we are treating islands in the Great Lakes like islands in the sea. Could someone confirm? I also noticed that part of a natural=wetland polygon is in the lake. Mike On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Jim McAndrew j...@loc8.us wrote: Mike, That's the issue! I know there's some weird stuff going on with the great lakes either being coastlines or giant lakes. I don't have any experience working on something that large in OSM. We are using OSM data for an NPS map, and Isle Royale is a NPS unit, so I'd like to try to get it to look as correct as possible. -- Jim On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Mike Thompson miketh...@gmail.com wrote: Jim, Are you referring to how Isle Royale spills into Lake Superior? Might it be a broken relation rather than a tagging issue? Mike On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Jim McAndrew j...@loc8.us wrote: I've been noticing some weird tile issues around the Great Lakes. What is the best way to tag these islands so they render properly? http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=13/47.9399/-88.8770 I suppose the lake might be frozen right now, so maybe it is correct :). Thanks! -- Jim ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Re: [Talk-us] Great Lakes Boundaries
I assume that should be natural=verywetland, yes? Yes! - Good one! Jim, I fixed the wetlands that extended into Lake Superior. The problem you pointed out seems to have gone away. However, Above zoom level 12 Isle Royale is flooded by the lake. This is true of other islands within Lake Superior (the exact zoom level varies at which this happens from island to island). I suspect that to do this right would mean making all of these islands inner members of the Lake Superior multipolygon. I can work on this over the weekend... unless someone beats me to it. Mike ___ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
