So it seems, although the OS at least manages to limit the ugliness factor. I wonder if there is some historical reason for it? Next time I use the ferry I'll ask the guy to make sure he stays in Devon :]
Kevin On 30 January 2013 11:37, Steve Doerr <[email protected]> wrote: > That's how it appears on OS maps, e.g. > http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=286849&Y=54821&A=Y&Z=115 > > Steve > > > On 30/01/2013 10:46, Jason Woollacott wrote: >> >> Hi Kevin, >> >> Agreed, it looks wrong... The data came from the OS Boundary Line data, >> which I took from the gpx trace from Colin's site, >> http://csmale.dev.openstreetmap.org/os_boundaryline/ >> >> I wish I knew the reasoning behind it... I can understand the boundary >> being at the low water mark, but it seems very odd just to draw it across >> at Dittisham. >> >> Jason >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Kevin Peat >> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 9:48 AM >> To: Jason Woollacott >> Cc: talk-gb >> Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] Fowey estuary coastline problem >> >> Hi Jason, >> >> On 30 January 2013 08:00, Jason Woollacott <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> This relates to some work I did on the Cornish county boundary a while >>> back, >>> the same also has happened at Newton Ferrers, just south of Plymouth. >>> >> >> I had been meaning to ask you about the boundary changes you made. Is >> it right that the county boundaries now go some way up the rivers? In >> the case of the River Dart all the way up to Dittisham. Just seems >> counterintuitive (+ also looks crap). >> >> Kevin (user:devonshire) >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-GB mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
