Hi Samuel, about a year ago, I removed natural=island ways from the Canvec data. Unless I'm confused (it appends sometime !-) it was applied for Release 7... The problem was that islands were/are overlaying all other features on rendering, including corresponding natural=wood features (ie : wooded islands renders white spot instead of green) If you still have natural=island features you should be in an area where the Release 7 could not be produced (about 30 files for the country) About the ghost ways, it was decided to create the Canvec product that way to ease partial/layer import (for example, import hydrography without wooded areas). However, once you have modified the data to merge both features, I don't see the need to keep ghost ways. Regards, Daniel
________________________________ From: Samuel Longiaru [mailto:longi...@shaw.ca] Sent: May 18, 2011 09:42 To: talk-ca Subject: [Talk-ca] CanVec natural=land tags and untagged ways Good morning everyone, I've been working for the last couple of months importing Canvec data into south-central BC and have almost completed the eastern half of 92I. I also have been lurking on the MkGMap list and one of the comments there today got me thinking that maybe I've been doing something wrong. Just wanted to get some comment here if I might. I can go back and fix things if need be. The procedure I have been using for importing is essentially a reflection of what I would normally do should I be mapping an area from scratch. I select a feature like wood, wetland, water, etc. from my CanVec data layer, check it against the existing OSM, merge where appropriate and delete the feature from my CanVec data layer so I can keep track of what I have done. At the end of this process, I am usually left with a couple of things in the CanVec layer which I discard. For example, after merging "wood", I delete it from the CanVec layer and in many cases am left with another untagged way that follows the wood boundary. This way has no tags at all and is not part of any relationship. As it normally would not be present should I have just traced the wood using Potlatch or JOSM, I delete it and do not import it into OSM. I have also been ignoring the natural=land tags that appear on islands in lakes. I have not been importing this tag since if I understand things correctly, it is sufficient to have islands tagged only as inner members of relationships. As a check, I have gone back and examined the rendered OSM maps, and all wood and islands are rendering correctly. I have also imported some of my imported CanVec data into my Garmin Nuvi through Lambertus's site and all render correctly as well. In response to a query on the MkGMap list as to why oceans were not rendering as blue on someone's Garmin (I have this problem too by the way) the comment was made that islands needed to be tagged as natural=land. I'm not sure that is actually the case but it did get me thinking about the island tags I have been discarding and the other superfluous CanVec data I have also been tossing. Is it OK to toss these natural=land tags? And what is going on with these ghost ways that appear under under the boundaries to wooded areas? OK to toss them as well?
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
