Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 9:11 PM Devonshire wrote: > Just because the coastline follows MLW as it goes around the coast > doesn't mean it needs to follow every tidal waterway inland. That > doesn't follow at all. Why not? What is the meaning of "coastline"? The Dart is one example of where it

Re: [Talk-GB] Trig Point references

Hi all, On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 09:58:28PM +0100, Simon Ritchie wrote: Hmm. Good point. Most of the data in Ian's database is contributed by the trigpointers - reports of visits to the trigs. Most of the data about the actual trigs on the site (position etc) comes from the OS. See this

[Talk-GB] ITOworld maps

ITOworld maps which showed a huge variety of visualisations of OSM data seems to have gone offline. For about a week now I've been getting 503 Service Unavailable No server is available to handle this request. Does anybody know what's happenng here? - those maps were incredibly useful Regards

Re: [Talk-GB] ITOworld maps

On 13/07/2019 15:33, Brian Prangle wrote: ITOworld  maps which showed a huge variety of visualisations of OSM data seems to have gone offline. For about a week now I've been getting 503 Service Unavailable No server is available to handle this request. Does anybody know what's happenng

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

Hi That page contains "The Mean low water spring is the position of the lowest tide. There is currently no agreed way of tagging this line in OSM. One way of tagging it is to tag the area between the mean low water spring and OSM

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 9:44 PM Colin Smale wrote: > Coastline would be the high water line, not low water. But your point is > valid - equating coastline to MHW could better be called a heuristic > instead of a rule. It works most of the time, but we have to accommodate > exceptions. All we have

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

On 13/07/2019 22:21, Colin Smale wrote: So what was your point again about internal waterways? The "extent of the realm" is not the 12-mile limit, it is ±MLW, isn't it? Assuming it is mapped correctly, this is an example of an administrative boundary that is outside the low water mark:

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

On Sat, Jul 13, 2019, at 12:47 PM, Borbus wrote: > ...That data is included with the OS tidal waters data. It's not much more > effort to use it and it's very useful data for many people. People use > maps for many different things. Rendering is not a problem. Carto > handles it just fine

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

On 2019-07-13 22:00, David Woolley wrote: > On 13/07/2019 20:53, Colin Smale wrote: > >> Another reason to want MLW in OSM: The "Extent of the Realm" is *for the >> most part* defined as MLWS. This is the limit of the jurisdiction of normal >> (local) government. Beyond MLWS, the local

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

On 2019-07-13 13:35, Borbus wrote: > On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 9:11 PM Devonshire wrote: >> Just because the coastline follows MLW as it goes around the coast >> doesn't mean it needs to follow every tidal waterway inland. That >> doesn't follow at all. > > Why not? What is the meaning of

Re: [Talk-GB] ITOworld maps

On 13/07/2019 15:33, Brian Prangle wrote: ITOworld  maps which showed a huge variety of visualisations of OSM data seems to have gone offline. Hi Brian, I suspect that many (most?) of the visualisations that ITO used to provide could be done with Overpass / Overpass turbo (even as far as

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

On 13/07/2019 20:53, Colin Smale wrote: Another reason to want MLW in OSM: The "Extent of the Realm" is *for the most part* defined as MLWS. This is the limit of the jurisdiction of normal (local) government. Beyond MLWS, the local council no longer has any say - it's the UK laws of the sea,

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

On 2019-07-13 22:30, Devonshire wrote: > Unfortunately, this is one of those fairly pointless discussions that > characterises OSM. I know it isn't always possible but I prefer the meaning > of words in OSM tags to have the same meaning as in everyday conversation. If > you want to add a way

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

Hi I meant that OSM does not have an agreed way of tagging MLWS or MLW.  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcoastline Regards On 13/07/2019 20:53, Colin Smale wrote: On 2019-07-13 21:33, Tony Shield wrote: Hi Personally think that High Water Mark and Low Water Mark are

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

On 13/07/2019 21:38, Colin Smale wrote: Have you got a reference for this, making the link between the boundary of the Realm and the MCA classification of an inland waterway? What could be a consequence of this? Could you illustrate this with an example? The MCA definition of "inland waters"

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

On 2019-07-13 23:07, David Woolley wrote: > On 13/07/2019 21:38, Colin Smale wrote: > >> Have you got a reference for this, making the link between the boundary of >> the Realm and the MCA classification of an inland waterway? >> What could be a consequence of this? Could you illustrate this

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

Hi Personally think that High Water Mark and Low Water Mark are very relevant to people and to OSM. Yeah - tides are a nuisance and can never be predicted with total accuracy and with Global Warming HWM and LWM will change over time. Then there are Highest and Lowest Astronomical Tides, and

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

On 2019-07-13 21:33, Tony Shield wrote: > Hi > > Personally think that High Water Mark and Low Water Mark are very relevant to > people and to OSM. > > Yeah - tides are a nuisance and can never be predicted with total accuracy > and with Global Warming HWM and LWM will change over time.

Re: [Talk-GB] UK coastline data

On 2019-07-13 22:42, Tony Shield wrote: > Hi > > I meant that OSM does not have an agreed way of tagging MLWS or MLW. > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dcoastline That page is about coastline, which is high water, not low water. But you are probably right. In the case of the