Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> writes: > Am 04.05.2020 um 15:19 schrieb Kevin Kenny: >> Elevation as height-above-ellipsoid, unless you're using it in the >> intermediate results of a GPS calculation, is nonsensical. > > However if you read the argumentation on the Altitude page that was > exactly the reasoning: store hae and therefore be able to calculate > datum specific heights easily after the fact.
Yes, but this is a ridiculous stramwan. HAE and height above wgs84 geoid are equally well defined, but one (height above geoid) is what is used for height and also happens to be almost matching all civil height systems. The real point here is that people want to take data that has a number but not a datum and enter it and feel good about themelves, instead of realizing and admitting that they are doing something fundamentally wrong. I am perfectly ok with entering a height that has no datum, and having some meta key that basically says that the height value is inaccurate, and perhaps "ele:datum=unknown" is good for this, crisply denoting that the height is without a solid basis. But, I find it unreasonable that people want to legitimize this sort of confusion, rather than mark it as confusion as a warning to others. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
