<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-16"?><html><head><style type="text/css"><!--blockquote.cite
{margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; padding-left: 10px; padding-right: 0px; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);}
blockquote.cite2
{margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px; padding-left: 10px; padding-right: 0px; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); margin-top: 3px; padding-top: 0px;}
body
{font-family: 'Segoe UI'; font-size: 12pt;}
--></style></head><body><div>Colin</div><div><br /></div><div>I was more talking about the actual shape of the MHW rather than its position; if that makes sense.</div><div><br /></div><div>some examples of problems in the Isle of Wight</div><div><br /></div><div>1) There's a section here <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/50.66636/-1.48566" style="font-size: 12pt;">http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/50.66636/-1.48566</a>, where the Bing imagery seems reasonably aligned to the gps tracks of the main road, but the gpx file for MHW seems to be too far to the north on the cliff area, and too far to the south on the area to the east. this beach shelves relatively steeply so there is unlikely to be much difference between MHWS & MHWN</div><div><br /></div><div>2) Even clearer is an area <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/50.69439/-1.09414" style="font-size: 12pt;">http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/50.69439/-1.09414</a>, OSM is much more accurate here than the OS Boundary Line</div><div><br /></div><div>3) The car park and ice rink here <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/50.73237/-1.15736" style="font-size: 12pt;">http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/50.73237/-1.15736</a> were built sometime around 1990, but Boundary line MHW would show these as flooded</div><div><br /></div><div>4) More inaccuracies here <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.76650/-1.30029" style="font-size: 12pt;">http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.76650/-1.30029</a></div><div><br /></div><div>David</div><div id="signature_old"></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>
<div>------ Original Message ------</div>
<div>From: "Colin Smale" <<a href="mailto:colin.smale@xs4all.nl">colin.smale@xs4all.nl</a>></div>
<div>To: <a href="mailto:talk-gb@openstreetmap.org">talk-gb@openstreetmap.org</a></div>
<div>Sent: 11/12/2016 22:17:44</div>
<div>Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] GB Coastline - PGS vs OS</div><div><br /></div>
<div id="x8045ef3001d2452" style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif"><blockquote cite="64467cfe7b9e4a180161b6d56c145553@xs4all.nl" type="cite" class="cite2">
<p>Hi David,</p>
<p>Looking at the spot you indicate on Bing imagery does indeed look like MHW should be above the salt-marsh areas. Looking at Google[1] it is however possible that the grass doesn't quite get submerged, even at the highest tides, so it might also be possible that it is strictly correct.</p>
<p>The Bing imagery is of course just a snapshot, and we don't know the state of the tide at the moment the photo was taken, so it can also be misleading. Even a personal visit is not really enough as MHW is apparently calculated over a 19-year cycle (not sure if OS use this though) and things could change a lot in that time. As MHW is an average, many tides will of course be higher.</p>
<p>The OS data looks a definite improvement for steeper coastlines, where combining OS admin boundaries with PGS coastlines produces many anomalies (admin boundary=MLW inland of coastline=MHW). I would definitely suggest applying the OS MHW data to address this kind of issue. But I agree, use of the OS data would need case-by-case judgements. However I still think the OS data is probably a better base to work from than (unimproved) PGS for reasons I mentioned earlier.</p>
<p>Could you give a couple of examples of problems you saw in the IoW?</p>
<p>//colin</p>
<div> </div>
<p>[1] <a href="https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5386032,0.6292606,3a,24.7y,277.12h,84.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMl8cwBlLLuOVtPES_DfkOQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656">https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5386032,0.6292606,3a,24.7y,277.12h,84.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMl8cwBlLLuOVtPES_DfkOQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656</a></p>
<p>On 2016-12-11 22:30, David Groom wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0" class="cite"><!-- html ignored --><!-- head ignored --><!-- meta ignored -->
<div class="pre" style="margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family: monospace">I suspect that even though much of the coastline is tagged "source=PGS" is has been amended by reference to Yahoo and after that Bing imagery, but the subsequent editors did not remove the "source=PGS" tag.<br /> <br /> Certainly comparing your gpx file for the Isle of Wight with the coastline currently in OSM there appear a number of places where the gpx file does not accurately represent MHW.<br /> <br /> I certainly would not want to see a wholesale replacement of what is in currently in OSM with OD Boundary Line data.<br /> <br /> Looking here <a href="http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.53546/0.60580">http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.53546/0.60580</a> an area near Southend, unless the Bing imagery is outdated, the Boundary Line data seems to be an odd representation of the coastline.<br /> <br /> David<br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;">On 11/12/2016 10:43, Colin Smale wrote:</span>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding: 0 0.4em; border-left: #1010ff 2px solid; margin: 0" class="cite"><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;">Hi,</span><br /> <br /> Most of the coastline is currently tagged as "source=PGS". As part of the Boundary-Line open data set OS provide MHW lines which look to be significantly better than the PGS data:<br /> <br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> * Much newer - updated twice a year, although I am not sure how old</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> the actual underlying survey data is (PGS coastlines seem to be</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> from 2006)</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> * Better resolution - more nodes, smoother curves</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> * Consistent with admin boundary data, so MLW never appears above</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> MHW (often a problem on rocky coastlines like Wales and Cornwall)</span><br /> <br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;">There are a couple of caveats when working with the OS data:</span><br /> <br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> * Where MHW=MLW, i.e. the MHW is colinear with the admin boundary at</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> MLW, there is a gap in the MHW data</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> * The MHW data goes miles inland in tidal estuaries, which is</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> correct from the MHW standpoint, but for coastlines I think we</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> need to cut across the estuaries at the right point to form the</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> correct baseline</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> * The MHW data is organised by area - down to constituency level.</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> Every time the line crosses the area boundary, it simply stops and</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"> you need to load the adjacent area to continue the line</span><br /> <br /> I have uploaded GPX versions of the October 2016 OS MHW data to <a href="http://csmale.dev.openstreetmap.org/os_boundaryline/mhw/">http://csmale.dev.openstreetmap.org/os_boundaryline/mhw/</a> with a file per county / unitary area (I have not produced the files for the higher-level regions or the lower-level constituency areas).<br /> <br /> In the Thames estuary around Southend and on the north Kent coast I have replaced the PGS data with the new OS data and to me it looks much better (in Potlatch) although the changes are not yet showing through on "the map". I think coastline changes are processed less frequently.<br /> <br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;">Any comments?</span><br /> <br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;">//colin</span><br /> <br /> </blockquote>
<br /> <br /> _______________________________________________<br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;">Talk-GB mailing list</span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"><a href="mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org">Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org</a></span><br /> <span style="white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb</a></span></div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote></div>
</body></html>