<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi,<br>
<br>
Regarding normalized layers.<br>
If I can believe my eyes, <a
href="http://www.hdtimelapse.net/content/HDtimelapse.net_City/HDtimelapse.net_City_3290_hirez.jpg">bridges/culverts
are under (uninterrupted foil) roads</a>: bridge=road-1.<br>
Unless a renderer must assume that, which should be stated in the
wiki, then bridge=road.<br>
If I can believe my eyes, 90° crossing rivers/roads run under
bridges, that is river=bridge-1.<br>
Unless a renderer must assume that, which should be stated in the
wiki, then river=bridge.<br>
A friend of mine says that we must start counting at 1 (like year
1) and hence that ground=1 (;-)).<br>
I'd like to know how many of you agree. While waiting, let's
assume ground=0.<br>
<br>
Hence, it depends very much on what the wiki states and we should
settle that before discussing.<br>
Assuming assumption, we have road=0, bridge=0, river=0.<br>
If the renderer does not assume anything we have road=0, bridge=-1
and river=-2.<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">
<p>On 2014-04-02 10:15, Pieren wrote :</p>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAPT3zJpDo9+aRZAz82k5CPwXyMDWC4v8L30V+EuZo4hswR9pQA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p wrap="">On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Andrew Errington
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:erringtona@gmail.com"><erringtona@gmail.com></a> wrote:
</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p wrap="">I have discovered a bunch of rivers and streams
with layer=-1 in my
local area. In my opinion this is simply wrong,
</p>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p wrap="">It's not wrong. It's just another way to use the tag
layer. I't not
because other contributors don't share you opinion that they
are
wrong.<br>
<br>
Pieren
</p>
<p>
</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Quite right. Everything is relative (Einstein). What is
certainly wrong is threatening to change what others have done
without warning (I won't quote those threats). That's called
vandalism and, if the victim fights back, a war.<br>
And all in all, that makes OSM a very bad reputation.<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p class="p185 ft39">L’exemple fournit par OpenStreetMap
révèle une
série de dimensions intéressantes en matière de production
de données
géographiques sur base participative. D’une part, il permet
la mise en
place d’un vaste réseau de volontaires qui contribuent à son
développement et à son utilisation, d’autre part, il pose
une série de
questions et soulève d’importants enjeux en matière de
qualité et de
validité des données. Ce système trouve un équilibre entre
le
développement d’une information géographique sur base
participative et
une qualité des données et des métadonnées qui n’est pas
forcément
l’équivalent de celle présente dans la chaîne de production
proposée
par les pouvoirs publics. En outre, en raison de ces enjeux
de
qualités, un problème d’interopérabilité émerge de façon
récurrente.</p>
</blockquote>
(<a
href="http://www.papou.byethost9.com/PDF/PSGW/axe4.html#mozTocId81246">translation
here</a>)<br>
That was written by the Belgian government. While being very
respectful of "OSM volunteering", they very politely regret a
quality level "not equivalent" to their expectations (their own
data), interoperability problems, and, in other statements, data
security, understand danger of vandalism.<br>
This very much affects the data we can get in return of what we
can offer.<br>
</p>
side note:<br>
<br>
On 2014-04-02 15:56, Richard Z. wrote
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:20140402135604.GA27043@localhost.localdomain"
type="cite">yes. It should be done with sensible presets, we can
not change the defaults
for features that are already in use for ages.
<br>
</blockquote>
Indeed, a few even resist the metric system ;-)<br>
US press: the Bluefin-21 can dive 14 763 ft deep (in fact, 14 764
;-)).<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>André.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>