On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 10:30 +0000, Peter Miller wrote: > On reflection possibly we should use river-bank as that has more > information in it, but recommend that anyone importing does a 'bridge > cleanup' at the same time.
This is an area I'm actually really interested in (for rural rivers) and keen to contribute. So far I've been put off by exactly this problem. Is a reasonable approach to use the OS data for river edges and then fill in the gaps (bridges etc) with OSM data? I guess its possible that the OSM data is better, but most of the rivers I look at are distinctly rougher than the OS data (not that that necessarily confers any information about accuracy). Same goes for lake and tarn boundaries. Cheers, Henry _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
