[Tagging] areas (eg rocks) underwater and across coastline/water shores

Richard Z. ricoz.osm at gmail.com
Thu Mar 26 12:35:28 UTC 2015


Hi,

it is mostly so that an area eg natural=bare_rock does not
end at the shoreline but extends some way under the water.
Current practice of having it end exactly on the shoreline
is both incorrect and a technical complication for mappers.

In many cases some of the underwater racks would be easy 
to map. Similar could apply to many other natural objects: 
ridges, cliffs and (sand) beaches usualy extend some way 
below water.
In fact mapping cliffs across rivers is the commonly used
solution in waterfall mapping.

So it would appear straightforward to map such natural features
across shore lines both under and above water.

How do people think about it? Should we generalise that approach
or seek another solutions?

What would happen with various renderers and other apps?

Should we use underwater/awash tag or prefix?

Richard





More information about the Tagging mailing list