> > About the waterways - I think many of the waterways (smaller ones) were > just traces of aerial imagery onto the topo maps. Waterways are too much of > a pain to do by GPS on such a large scale so I couldn't see them being too > accurate, unless you get a municipality's watershed layers which I've found > to be very accurate and detailed, but those aren't available to the public > or under the CC so it doesn't matter anyways. For all we know the federal > data could have been aerial-->paper topo-->digitized, meaning it could be > very innacurate. I don't know what the metadata says since I'm at work and > can't (shouldn't) access it, so I don't know if it says in there what the > source is. I think a user who knows the area should be the one who decides > what should happen to the waterway or at least compare the bot loaded data > with the aerial imagery that's already available to decide which is nearest > to the actual location. > > -Kevin (Kevo) >
Cool, Yup, the provider for this particular data feature (single line watercourse) is "Federal" and vector, & 19 meters off. So judging by the flickr photos of the area, i see that in fact the waterway is a "stream" rather than a "river". So i think i will make "stream" the default for the non-isolated watercourse's. (although in the spring after a heavy snow winter, that creek could be a river) :-) Also, now we have 2 separate people who have been on that roadway as well as will get more GPS Traces on the way. Cool :-) Do you have an area that you'd like to see as a sample? Cheers, Sam Vekemans Across Canada Trails
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
