[Tagging] Using multipolygons to map bays in Alaska

Christoph Hormann osm at imagico.de
Fri Nov 16 11:24:05 UTC 2018


On Friday 16 November 2018, Dave Swarthout wrote:
>
> To answer Christoph's question about Chickaloon Bay and the node for
> the same bay, I simply forgot to delete the redundant node after I
> finished. Interestingly, the label for the new multipolygon fell only
> slightly to the east of the node so its placement was fairly
> accurate. However, in order to see the name on that node, one must
> zoom in so far that you have no idea whatsoever of the physical
> extent of the actual object. I know, that's a rendering issue. Still,
> the reason many of us enjoy mapping is so we can see the results of
> our labors somehow, preferably on a map, so it's a powerful incentive
> to do things in such a way that results in visualization. There is an
> enduring tension in the OSM world that we're always seeking to
> balance and this discussion is largely about where that balance lies.

Yes, as already said i understand that and this is why i do not 
primarily blame you or other mappers for using non-verifiable drawings 
to map bays and straits but Daniel for incentivizing that for 
ultimately selfish reasons.

As a data user i am relatively relaxed on this because it is not a big 
problem to reduce all these polygon drawings to a node before i use the 
data.  But i would not want to map or do data maintainance in an area 
with such drawings.  I see this as a problem of pollution control.  Not 
to litter the environment, not to pollute the air just because it is 
convenient.

> Also, sorry, I cannot see how representing a strait the size and
> importance of the Shelikof Strait (every Alaskan knows about this
> famous water passage) with a single way could work. A way is totally
> inadequate for such a task. Maybe that trick would work for a narrow
> strait that resembles a fjord but not for one as large as this one.

Yes, i completely understand how this seems this way but i also know 
that this is due to you not realizing how fairly easily you can 
computationally assess the shape and the size of the street from a 
single properly placed node.  I will keep this case in mind for the 
future as a good example to illustrate that.

Note the current node:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5999961722

is of course not suitably placed.  Correct position would be around 
here:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=57.9877&mlon=-154.0407#map=9/57.9877/-154.0407

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/



More information about the Tagging mailing list