[Tagging] Rio de la Plata edit war
joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Mon Jan 13 10:28:30 UTC 2020
It's fine for the area of the river (waterway=riverbank or
natural=water + water=river) to extend out to that line, but that's
the extreme limit of the estuary and it's part of the marine
The coastline should extend up higher to where the flow of the river
is consistenly stronger than the tides and wind-driven currents.
Was the mapper in changeset 79201390 deleting the river water area at
the same time? I think a good compromise would be to keep that area
too, which would allay the nationist concerns of local mappers that
their "world's widest river"(c) not be demoted.
I hope the political reasons for these claims are not so strong for a
reasonable solution to be discussed.
I've been meaning to make a proposal about estuaries in general. -It
would be nice to have a more consistent way to map them, both as
outside of the coastline but with a water area tagged with estuary=yes
or similar. I think I mentioned this a few months back but got busy
with other projects.
- Joseph Eisenberg
On 1/13/20, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> it appears that once again mappers are in diasgreement about how to map
> the Rio de la Plata, here
> This is a disagreement that had already flared up three years ago, and
> is now coming back.
> According to Wikipedia, the International Hydrographic Organization
> defines the eastern boundary of the Río de la Plata as "a line joining
> Punta del Este, Uruguay and Cabo San Antonio, Argentina", which is what
> has been the case in OSM until now:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/186710973 (the coastline across the
> "mouth" of the "river")
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3474227 (the "river")
> This current representation in OSM leads to a few strange situations
> especially in toolchains/map styles that use different colours for
> inland water and oceans, or that draw sea depths, or just highlight the
> coastline. Buenos Aires, according to OSM, is currently not a coastal city.
> One of the involved mappers who aligned the coastline more closely with
> the coast wrote (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/79201390) "I
> believe this is inline with guidance
> I'm not so clear about how to interpret the wiki page myself when it
> comes to river mouths. There's a clarifying proposal here
> but this is still at the proposal stage.
> Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Tagging