On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:29 PM, James A. Treacy <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > I have been adding canvec data for the last part of the Bruce > Peninsula and noticed that the existing shoreline is quite different > than that given by the canvec data. The source for the existing > coastline is r_coastlines and I have no idea who/what that is. > I don't know which is more accurate but the canvec coastline matches > much better with the land features. > > Should the existing coastline be left alone or should it be switched > over?
Dear Jay, That's the eternal question isn't it? With one source, we just use it. With multiple sources; it's always about evaluation and comparison. ;-) r_coastlines doesn't ring a bell, but I know that PGS coastlines was fairly easy to improve upon. Sounds like you are seeing canvec as a better match to the other land features, which may also be from canvec. I'm not sure you should see that as definitive. But if the canvec is a better match, and yahoo / Bing don't disagree, ... ? If you decide to proceed, and the water bodies are tagged as coastline, be aware that coastline rendering is sensitive, and does not re-render immediately. _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
