In some areas where the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) has been
imported, the rendering of the data is less than desirable. I am not
sure if this is something that should be fixed in renderers or in the
data.
The issue is that the NHD includes polygons for waterbodies in one
data set, and
* David Fawcett david.fawc...@gmail.com [2011-02-18 10:13 -0600]:
In some areas where the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) has been
imported, the rendering of the data is less than desirable. I am not
sure if this is something that should be fixed in renderers or in the
data.
IMHO, it's a
Thanks for your input Phil. I don't have strong opinions about what
data should be stored, I just think that when the default public map
looks ugly/broken, people start to question other data elements as
well.
It will be interesting to see if people can actually build and
maintain hydro networks
Here in Canada with the NHN import the portion of streams through lakes and
wider rivers were imported with sub_sea=stream sub_sea:type=inferred
oneway=yes accuracy:meters=-1 (and source/attribution tags), but that import
needed a lot of clean up after it. I've been changing the sub_sea=stream to
On 2/18/2011 3:43 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
Here in Canada with the NHN import the portion of streams through lakes and
wider rivers were imported with sub_sea=stream sub_sea:type=inferred
oneway=yes
There is some disagreement about using oneway=yes, presumably to match
the stream flow. There
The default render should be with connectors below the water bodies. AKA
render issue. Possibly there should be some way to force it to render on
top, and that would probably need a new tag. The main reason would be to
show the navigation route if it is restricted or complicated. Shallow water
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:37 PM, Dale Puch dale.p...@gmail.com wrote:
The default render should be with connectors below the water bodies. AKA
render issue. Possibly there should be some way to force it to render on
top, and that would probably need a new tag. The main reason would be to
On 2/18/2011 7:45 PM, Richard Weait wrote:
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:37 PM, Dale Puchdale.p...@gmail.com wrote:
That said, for now using oneway is better than not tagging flow
direction.
I disagree. Water flow direction is recorded by the direction of the
way, same as steps up direction is
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:58 PM, Nathan Edgars II nerou...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/18/2011 7:45 PM, Richard Weait wrote:
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:37 PM, Dale Puchdale.p...@gmail.com wrote:
That said, for now using oneway is better than not tagging flow
direction.
I disagree. Water flow
On Tuesday, February 15, 2011 05:23:28 PM Coast, Hurricane wrote:
Any suggestions on where to look for other users interested in this, or free
and open data import sites, all information will be helpful.
IMHO, it's a _very_ bad idea to suggest doing imports as a PotM…
Perhaps, for National
On 2/18/2011 8:22 PM, Richard Weait wrote:
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:58 PM, Nathan Edgars IInerou...@gmail.com wrote:
I never knew that about steps, and have thus mapped roughly half the number
of steps I've added incorrectly. In addition, for waterways, there's no way
to say I don't know what
11 matches
Mail list logo
