Others gave opinions, I agree with a lot of statements.
So let me give a round of personnal agreement (+1's) to these:
> Personally I would prefer an approximate polygon to a node.
> I don't like boundary=informal though. It should be something more verbose
> regarding what kind of region this
Am 28.03.2016 um 08:28 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
Am 27.03.2016 um 21:59 schrieb Colin Smale :
If we can't mark polygons as fuzzy, then we can only allow 'accurate' polygons
well, as was proposed above, we could introduce a way to store fuzzy areas
without using polygons, or by using more th
sent from a phone
> Am 27.03.2016 um 21:59 schrieb Colin Smale :
>
> If we can't mark polygons as fuzzy, then we can only allow 'accurate' polygons
well, as was proposed above, we could introduce a way to store fuzzy areas
without using polygons, or by using more than one polygon as one obje
The precision/accuracy is not only limited by the instruments used but
also the knowledge used.
For some things OSM has access to very precise data. In other instances
it is fuzzy. For some things .. the past entries has been much improved
by new data from other sources (sometimes opening of
This sort of object is common in Thailand. We have many gated communities
here whose boundaries are not exactly known although they are sometimes
fairly obvious in aerial imagery because of being surrounded by a wall or
fence of some sort. I create a polygon using Bing imagery, tag it as
place=neig
Fuzzy boundaries do have their place. Currently we use sharp boundaries for
landuse, but often the boundary is really fuzzy. A wooded area would be a
good example of a where a fuzzy boundary might be employed. But the
fuzziness of a wooded area may only be a few meters. The fuzziness
of "Shakespear
If we can't mark polygons as fuzzy, then we can only allow 'accurate'
polygons. Then we are back to square one, with no way of accommodating
these regions except for a simple node.
I think the problem is clear (how do we represent regions whose
boundaries are not precisely defined). Time to talk
Den 27. mars 2016 21.36.01 CEST, skrev Martin Koppenhoefer
:
>
>
>sent from a phone
>
>> Am 27.03.2016 um 21:16 schrieb Anders Fougner
>:
>>
>> Did you already consider a fuzzy tag (such as fuzzy=yes or
>boundary_fuzzy=yes)?
>
>
>that's a makeshift which isn't quite elegant and still has simila
sent from a phone
> Am 27.03.2016 um 21:16 schrieb Anders Fougner :
>
> Did you already consider a fuzzy tag (such as fuzzy=yes or
> boundary_fuzzy=yes)?
that's a makeshift which isn't quite elegant and still has similar problems
(things that seem to be in might be out and vice versa).
ch
sent from a phone
> Am 27.03.2016 um 20:50 schrieb Clifford Snow :
>
> I agree using polygons is far superior to nodes. The question I'm raising is
> do these fuzzy areas belong in OSM.
agreed, adding fuzzy areas in a way that suggests they are well delimited areas
(polygons) is questionabl
>I agree using polygons is far superior to nodes. The question I'm
>raising
>is do these fuzzy areas belong in OSM. Using my example for the
>Cascadia
>(Independence Area) a polygon with the boundary could be used to search
>for
>features in the OSM database.
>
>Clifford
Did you already consider
On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> well, this didn't prevent 12% of mappers to add neighborhoods as areas
> anyway: http://taginfo.osm.org/tags/place=neighbourhood
>
The discussion was around neighborhoods that did not have a clear boundary,
n
sent from a phone
> Am 27.03.2016 um 19:00 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny :
>
> Areas with completely undefined borders should not be stored in OSM.
who if not the crowd would be able to iteratively come to approximations of
these borders. As long as the existence of the area is not disputed all
sent from a phone
> Am 27.03.2016 um 18:50 schrieb Clifford Snow :
>
> A while back one of the conversations on the mailing list was about adding
> neighborhood boundaries. There was a lot of concern that many neighborhood
> boundaries are not clearly define which would result in boundary dis
On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 19:16:42 +0200
Anders Fougner wrote:
>
>
> Den 27. mars 2016 19.00.18 CEST, skrev Mateusz Konieczny
> :
> >On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 09:50:21 -0700
> >Clifford Snow wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> >> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > I agree that a
Den 27. mars 2016 19.00.18 CEST, skrev Mateusz Konieczny :
>On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 09:50:21 -0700
>Clifford Snow wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
>> > > wrote:
>>
>> > I agree that a rough polygon seems better than a node because it
>> > allows to estimate the size
On Sun, 27 Mar 2016 09:50:21 -0700
Clifford Snow wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> > wrote:
>
> > I agree that a rough polygon seems better than a node because it
> > allows to estimate the size (a new relation datatype would even be
> > better, like a collection o
On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> I agree that a rough polygon seems better than a node because it allows to
> estimate the size (a new relation datatype would even be better, like a
> collection of (existing/already mapped) things inside (role) and outside
> (role) th
sent from a phone
> Am 27.03.2016 um 11:47 schrieb Colin Smale :
>
> In the UK the word "country" is also used in that context, for example
> "Shakespeare Country", "White Cliffs Country", "Black Country".
>
> I would suggest a relation with type=boundary and boundary=informal, plus an
> ind
On Sunday 27 March 2016, David Marchal wrote:
> Hello, there.
> At least here, in France, there are numerous regions, whose unity is
> based either on a common historical background, for example as a
> medieval county or duchy like the Barrois, or on a uniform natural
> landscape, as the Bauges mou
Good question.
In the UK the word "country" is also used in that context, for example
"Shakespeare Country", "White Cliffs Country", "Black Country".
As to whether a node or a polygon should be used... Personally I would
prefer an approximate polygon to a node. A node may indicate location,
but
Hello, there.
At least here, in France, there are numerous regions, whose unity is based
either on a common historical background, for example as a medieval county or
duchy like the Barrois, or on a uniform natural landscape, as the Bauges
mountains or the Mont Blanc massif. These regions are of
22 matches
Mail list logo
