Hi
2018-02-27 13:10 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
> I would facilitate things if navigable waterways are connected.
> Small streams should maybe only connect to the water body (lake).
>
> In theory you could do waterway routing similar to how pedestrian routing
> is done with squares in the che
2018-02-23 11:35 GMT+01:00 Rory McCann :
> But then how far do you go? Should every stream be connected to the
> central river? e.g. what about here ( http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi
> /?view=water&lon=28.57869&lat=-16.75136&zoom=11 )?
>
>
I would facilitate things if navigable waterways are conne
I'd like to reiterate that (much like riverbanks) the shoreline of a lake
can change far faster than the river channel. While the area maps the
"usual" extent (ignoring droughts and floods), the line is a very useful
abstraction.
Not connecting rivers into a network invalidates the idea of a netwo
2018-02-23 15:36 GMT+01:00 Rory McCann :
> If OSM takes a "all rivers must be connected through lakes", then data
> consumers have a simple job. If OSM says "some will and some won't", then
> data consumers have to process the data to add intra-lake connections. If
> they have to do it some of the
On 23/02/18 11:58, François Lacombe wrote:
If some rivers/streams shouldn't be connected, then some data consumers
will have to do an automatic connection anyway. When measuring water run
off and pollution, you probably want to know that "stuff going into
stream X will eventually
On Friday 23 February 2018, Rory McCann wrote:
>
> But then how far do you go? Should every stream be connected to the
> central river? e.g. what about here (
> http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=water&lon=28.57869&lat=-16.75136
>&zoom=11 )?
>
> If some rivers/streams shouldn't be connected, then
On 2018-02-23 11:35, Rory McCann wrote:
On 23/02/18 06:53, Maarten Deen wrote:
I see nothing wrong with those examples, I would do it the same,
especially if the rivers can be sailed on by boat. Then you absolutely
need the rivers to be connected to a central river (or fairway) in the
lake.
(Sorry Rory, resent this to Talk ML)
2018-02-23 11:35 GMT+01:00 Rory McCann :
> On 23/02/18 06:53, Maarten Deen wrote:
>
>> I see nothing wrong with those examples, I would do it the same,
>> especially if the rivers can be sailed on by boat. Then you absolutely need
>> the rivers to be connecte
Hi all,
Slightly off topic, but I was recently wondering if there was a waterway
routing tool available? As in, I'd like to click a point in a waterway and
have the downstream route plotted, presumably to the sea. It appears to me
that a tool like that could be useful in this discussion?
Despite
On 23/02/18 06:53, Maarten Deen wrote:
I see nothing wrong with those examples, I would do it the same,
especially if the rivers can be sailed on by boat. Then you absolutely
need the rivers to be connected to a central river (or fairway) in the
lake.
But then how far do you go? Should every
2018-02-23 6:53 GMT+01:00 Maarten Deen :
> On 2018-02-22 22:59, Rory McCann wrote:
>
> If you asked someone "Where does this river end?" they'd probably point
>> to where it joins the lake. Connecting the river to the "central river"
>> breaks this. And it can result in odd long ways. I might have
Greetings!
I saw a nice argument somewhere about the lines for larger rivers that
might be applicable here:
Imagine if the water level dropped significantly - the areas would be off
(but should be kept at their normal level unless the change is likely to be
reasonably permanent) but the lines shou
On 2018-02-22 22:59, Rory McCann wrote:
Hi mappers,
What's the best way to map rivers that flow into lakes, especially when
another river flows through it? Should they be connected?
When a river flows through a lake, you can map a waterway=river way
through it, to be "topoligcally complete". Or
On Thursday 22 February 2018, Rory McCann wrote:
>
> What's the best way to map rivers that flow into lakes, especially
> when another river flows through it? Should they be connected?
>
> [...]
This has been discussed in the past occasionally and IIRC there was
never full agreement on the matter
14 matches
Mail list logo