[Tagging] Stop the large feature madness

Graeme Fitzpatrick graemefitz1 at gmail.com
Wed Apr 17 22:12:57 UTC 2019

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 03:35, Michael Patrick <geodesy99 at gmail.com> wrote:

> our map would look like this :-)   http://bit.ly/2IGkgoj

That's an amazing image, thanks Michael.

I take it that's the home location of all OSM contributors?

I'm surprised that India & especially China (where I thought OSM was
banned?) are covered so well, & also a bit surprised that Australia & NZ
have dropped back into the Ocean - I thought there were a few more of us
than that? - us few seem to have done a pretty good job then!

(cc'ed to AU list for interest's sake :-))



> Also, in regard to how 'sharp' the boundaries some of these
> very large features are, if a person has a passing knowledge
> of 'road cut' geology and mineralogy, they are incredibly
> distinct, especially in the American Southwest. They are
> also identifiable from DEM/DSM analysis, sometimes as
> easily as coloring the elevation.
> I somewhat agree that 'if' it was at all to go into OSM,
> there would be a special interest group that would
> ride herd on a specialized name space. These geologic
> regions are essentially 'historical' features, some on
> the order of a billion years :-)
> Michael
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190418/5299368e/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list