<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /></head><body style='font-size: 10pt; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif'>
<p>On 2018-09-03 22:20, Christoph Hormann wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">
<div class="pre" style="margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: monospace">
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0">The estuarine situation will always be hard to deal with, and I think<br /> we'll simply need to have rough guidelines and then trust the<br /> judgment of the locals.</blockquote>
<br /> This is essentially the situation we have right now. Judgement of local <br /> mappers is usually fine (with the exception of political cases like the <br /> Rio de la Plata). Most problems occur because armchair mappers <br /> misinterpret the local situation or when inexperienced mappers are <br /> unaware of the significance of distinguishing between ocean and <br /> riverbank mapping.</div>
<div class="pre" style="margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: monospace"> </div>
</blockquote>
<div class="pre" style="margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: monospace">What guidance do we give to the local mappers? Coastline up to tidal limit, or draw a line across wherever you think fit? Coastline and riverbank are IMHO not mutually exclusive.</div>
<div class="pre" style="margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: monospace"> </div>
<div class="pre" style="margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: monospace">Given a properly formulated rule-of-thumb, why should remote armchair mappers come to a different conclusion to local mappers in this case? Or are you proposing such a wide tolerance that basically anything will fit, thus avoiding the discussion instead of actually tackling it?</div>
<div class="pre" style="margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: monospace"> </div>
<div class="pre" style="margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: monospace"> </div>
</body></html>