On Friday 05 July 2019, Darafei "Komяpa" Praliaskouski wrote: > > http://disaster.ninja/live/ > <http://disaster.ninja/live/#overlays=alert-shape-GDACS_EQ_1183112_12 >65046,bivariate_class;id=GDACS_EQ_1183112_1265046;layer=default-style; >position=-13.88712117940031,30.076044779387132;zoom=2.4760319802318693 >> > > What do you think?
Are your densities in people/object per ground square kilometers or per mercator square kilometers? (just to be sure - this is the number one mistake of any kind of density analysis in the OSM context) One warning: All global population data sets that exist are rough estimates with usually significant systematic biases and errors. For example in Switzerland the data set you used sees high population density in mountain areas with no basis in reality. And i am not a fan of deliberately pixelated visualizations where the data is shown in a pixel grid at a coarser resolution than what the display offers. Apart from that this is an interesting analysis. It would be kind of nice to also do it separately for density of features that actually correlate with population density in reality (buildings, roads, addresses, shops etc.) and physical geography, which can be mapped just as densely in areas with no population as in densely populated areas. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
