You cannot point to other area that may, in fact, be improperly mapped as an
example when they are like that because locals have been shouted down for doing
it correctly. The fact that this keeps coming back up literally means that
there is not universal agreement that "marginal seas", whatever that means, are
to be mapped with natural=coastline.
The Chesapeake Bay is an estuary that, by definition, opens to the sea. It
can't be a sea and open to a sea at the same time. In this environment, it is
different from the ocean in which it opens into and is also different from the
tributaries that feed it. These are protected waters for ships. You won't find
any high seas forecasts for the Bay unlike the ocean. The Bay is also brackish
and not defined as salt water, unlike the ocean.
If the rendering engine isn't showing it correctly, fix that; *that's* what's
broken.
Eric
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Saturday, November 21, 2020 1:14 PM, Joseph Eisenberg
<joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Eric,
> I don't think the previous discussion is quite as inconclusive as your
> evaluation.
>
> While it is true that there is not widespread agreement on where the
> natural=coatline ways should transect a river mouth or river estuary, there
> is nearly universal agreement that marginal seas, including bays, are mapped
> with the natural=coastline.
>
> Using the rendering at https://www.openstreetmap.de/karte.html - which
> differentiates the marine water polygons outside of the coastline from lakes
> and rivers, by using slightly different colors, we can see how bays are
> mapped in other parts of North America and the world.
>
> For example, check out Delaware Bay, just up the coast from your area:
> https://www.openstreetmap.de/karte.html?zoom=10&lat=39.14649&lon=-75.07302&layers=B000
> - it is mapped as a natural=bay with natural=coastline around it, not
> natural=water
>
> Upper and Lower New York Bay are mapped as bays outside of the
> natural=coastline - you can see the line where the waterway=riverbank area
> starts just at the north end of Manhattan island (though this placement is
> somewhat controversial) -
> https://www.openstreetmap.de/karte.html?zoom=10&lat=40.63628&lon=-73.93525&layers=B000
>
> Tampa Bay:
> https://www.openstreetmap.de/karte.html?zoom=10&lat=27.80801&lon=-82.63368&layers=B000
> - outside of the natural=coastline
>
> Galveston Bay:
> https://www.openstreetmap.de/karte.html?zoom=10&lat=29.49869&lon=-94.94249&layers=B000TT
> - outside of the natural=coastline
>
> San Francisco Bay and connected bays:
> https://www.openstreetmap.de/karte.html?zoom=10&lat=37.79939&lon=-122.06911&layers=B000TT
> - outside of the coastline
>
> Puget Sound - while Lake Washington on the east side of Seattle is
> natural=water, also most of the ship canal connecting them:
> https://www.openstreetmap.de/karte.html?zoom=11&lat=47.59544&lon=-122.39252&layers=B000
>
> I would like to request that the tidal channels and estuaries around
> Chesapeake Bay be re-mapped with natural=coastline. If you wish to keep the
> natural-water polygons for the estuaries that is not a problem.
>
> But it would be contrary to normal practice to map the main body of
> Chesapeake Bay as natural=water because it is clearly part of the sea - there
> is no barrier between it and the open ocean, since there is an open channel
> through US 13 where the tunnel is. While it is an estuary by hydrological
> definitions, so are the Baltic Sea and all fjords and Puget Sound and San
> Francisco Bay - all of which are mapped as outside of the natural=coastline.
>
> Also please consider that the community here approved the proposal for
> waterway=tidal_channel which said that the area of tidal channels (aka tidal
> creeks) should be mapped with natural=coastline at their edges - see
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dtidal_channel#How_to_Map
> and
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:waterway%3Dtidal_channel
> - most of the "creek" features along the Bay are tidal channels.
>
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 6:46 AM Eric H. Christensen via Tagging
> <tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>>
>> On Wednesday, November 18th, 2020 at 11:34 PM, Brian M. Sperlongano
>> <zelonew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This was fascinating reading. I do agree that we ought to have a definition
>>> for what gets tagged natural=coastline, and I think it's fine if that
>>> definition has some subjectivity.
>>>
>>> I would offer something as simple as:
>>>
>>> "The coastline should follow the mean high tide line. In some cases this
>>> rule would result in the coastline extending an unreasonable distance along
>>> the banks of tidal rivers. In those cases, mappers should identify a
>>> reasonable choke point at which to terminate the inland extent of coastline
>>> tagging."
>>
>> I would just classify it as "where the ocean meets the land". Any other
>> water that isn't ocean should be mapped as water and tagged appropriately.
>> That makes the map more accurate and detailed.
>>
>> R,
>> Eric
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
