On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 04:29:53 +0100,
Paul Norman wrote:
The Great Lakes have been discussed a few times on the local lists
and the conclusion has been arrived at that they are best represented
with natural=coastline.
Could you give a short overview of the reasoning leading to the
decision?
I
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 02:48:03PM +0100, malenki wrote:
Jochen Topf wrote:
Please do not add more (and more difficult cases like lakes on
islands in lakes on land) to the data, otherwise this process will get
more brittle than it already is.
Well, that is a word.
What do you think of
Christoph Hormann wrote:
[some more lakes with coastlines]
thanks for the overview
Lake Ontario and Rybinsk Reservoir have both been newly tagged as
coastline recently agaist the general moratorium:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27591832
On Wednesday 18 February 2015, Jochen Topf wrote:
The Great Lakes should move away from the natural=coastline mapping.
I myself have fixed this for some other lakes but didn't want to
touch the Great Lakes because they are, well, so great, and in parts
mapped in a lot of detail. I home
On Wednesday 18 February 2015, malenki wrote:
Lake Ontario and Rybinsk Reservoir have both been newly tagged as
coastline recently agaist the general moratorium:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27591832
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/28625595
Regarding the latters changeset
On Wednesday 18 February 2015 15:29:28 malenki wrote:
colliar wrote:
Am 18.02.2015 um 14:48 schrieb malenki:
Jochen Topf wrote:
Please do not add more (and more difficult cases like lakes on
islands in lakes on land) to the data, otherwise this process will
get more brittle than it
Jochen Topf wrote:
Please do not add more (and more difficult cases like lakes on
islands in lakes on land) to the data, otherwise this process will get
more brittle than it already is.
Well, that is a word.
What do you think of the Great Lakes mapped (partly) both with
coastline and MPs?
colliar wrote:
Am 18.02.2015 um 14:48 schrieb malenki:
Jochen Topf wrote:
Please do not add more (and more difficult cases like lakes on
islands in lakes on land) to the data, otherwise this process will
get more brittle than it already is.
Well, that is a word.
What do you think of
Am 18.02.2015 um 14:48 schrieb malenki:
Jochen Topf wrote:
Please do not add more (and more difficult cases like lakes on
islands in lakes on land) to the data, otherwise this process will get
more brittle than it already is.
Well, that is a word.
What do you think of the Great Lakes
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 09:33:14PM +0100, Richard Z. wrote:
coastline. Everything else would seem like a nightmare and I do not think
there is any reasonable ground for the distinction of coastlines according
to lake/ocean type.
Perhaps we should be a bit more bold and map all bigger lakes
The Great Lakes have been discussed a few times on the local lists and the
conclusion has been arrived at that they are best represented with
natural=coastline.
It's important to remember that the direction of coastline ways matters (land
on the left), and it is possible to look at a lake or
On Tuesday 17 February 2015, malenki wrote:
1 ways each with 2000 nodes would be 20 million nodes. Evenly
distributed on 14000 km outline means a node distance of 70cm - your
average node distance seems to be more in the range of 10-20m - i
suppose something is wrong here, for
On Tuesday 17 February 2015, malenki wrote:
I am working on Lake Nasser* and can predict that after enhancing
it's shore the resulting MP will be quite big.
Based on what I have done so far I'd expect an Multipolygon (MP) with
about 10.000 Members and an outline of 14.000 km length. A relation
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 07:45:31PM +0100, malenki wrote:
I am working on Lake Nasser* and can predict that after enhancing
it's shore the resulting MP will be quite big.
Based on what I have done so far I'd expect an Multipolygon (MP) with
about 10.000 Members and an outline of 14.000 km
I am working on Lake Nasser* and can predict that after enhancing
it's shore the resulting MP will be quite big.
Based on what I have done so far I'd expect an Multipolygon (MP) with
about 10.000 Members and an outline of 14.000 km length. A relation of
this size is no good idea in hindsight of
Christoph Hormann wrote:
On Tuesday 17 February 2015, malenki wrote:
Based on what I have done so far I'd expect an Multipolygon (MP) with
about 10.000 Members and an outline of 14.000 km length. A relation
of this size is no good idea in hindsight of maintainability and
conflicts due
malenki wrote:
For curiosity I had a look at the first version of Lake Nasser – the
shore was 1733 km long.
PS: if you want to have a look, too:
http://malenki.ch/OSM/data/first_lake_nasser_complete_v1.osm
___
talk mailing list
17 matches
Mail list logo
