[Tagging] natural=bay as nodes are evil
Christoph Hormann
chris_hormann at gmx.de
Sun Oct 26 20:38:21 UTC 2014
On Sunday 26 October 2014, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> > Furthermore the outer edge of a bay, i.e. the edge that is not
> > coastline is usually not well defined and would require an
> > arbitrary cutoff.
>
> Yes, cutoff is unfortunately quite arbitrary. But node placement is
> completely arbitrary - and lacks important information.
I don't see what information is missing and cannot be easily determined
automatically with a properly placed node that is contained in an
area - except for the outer edge of course, which is usually
ill-defined though as you said yourself.
If you think about it a bit and do not try to place the node where you
would place the label (which depends on the map projection anyway)
properly placing a node for a bay is usually quite simple. The most
difficult are long, fjord-like bays where a way along them would be
more appropriate.
Specific arguments aside - i am not sure if you realize the consequences
it would have if subareas of oceans would generally be mapped as
polygons - large bays usually contain smaller bays and are parts of a
sea and there might be a strait between an island and the coast within
that bay. If you want to edit the coastline in such situation you
would end up having to deal with a handful of convoluted multipolygon
relations, some of them of colossal size. Properly editing coastlines
is difficult for beginners in the first place. This would make it
borderline impossible.
--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/
More information about the Tagging
mailing list