Sure. But is there a standard method to indicate this uncertainty in OSM, which can be processed by data consumers?
Mvg Peter Elderson > Op 18 aug. 2018 om 01:35 heeft Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> het volgende > geschreven: > > What you are trying to refer to is 'measurement uncertainty'. > > For a non professional rough guide; > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurement_uncertainty > > Naturally formed water way widths may have a great deal of variation along > their widths .. and so the uncertainty will be very high unless specified > along short segments. > >> On 18/08/18 09:11, Peter Elderson wrote: >> It would not be that hard to add a precision to a measurement. Any >> measurement. Maybe there already is a standard method for that? >> >> Mvg Peter Elderson >> >> Op 17 aug. 2018 om 20:50 heeft SelfishSeahorse <selfishseaho...@gmail.com> >> het volgende geschreven: >> >>>> On Friday, August 17, 2018, Christoph Hormann <o...@imagico.de> wrote: >>>> On Friday 17 August 2018, SelfishSeahorse wrote: >>>> >>>> > Of course we could just use width=*, but it's not always easily >>>> > possible to measure the width (e.g. in a forest) and sometimes it >>>> > changes often. >>>> >>>> I would translate this into "i want a subjective non-verifiable >>>> classification system but i hide this by defining pro forma verifiable >>>> criteria for the classes". >>> >>> A classification based on width is arbitrary, but i don't see why it be >>> subjective. >>> >>>> If you want to map the river width tag width=*, if you don't want to map >>>> the width then don't create classes based on width thresholds. >>> >>> Imagine a stream/brook in a forest, not visible on satellite imagery. You >>> can't measure its width on site (because you don't have the equipment or >>> because the soil at its sides is marshy), but you know (estimate) that it's >>> wider than 1 metre, but less wide than 3 metres. In my opinion it's better >>> to have that information that none. >>> >>> If you enter width="1 m - 3 m", data users very likely won't understand it. >>> However if you enter width="2 m", the width value pretends to be exact. >>> Besides it is very unlikely that someone else verifies that value, >>> considering the fact that less than 1% of waterway=* tags have a width=* >>> tag. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Tagging mailing list >>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
