[talk-au] A proposal to change Botany Bay into a relation

Andrew Harvey andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com
Sun Oct 10 11:37:38 BST 2010


On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 5:20 PM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Me personally I like the maritime law description, where the coast
> line cuts across bays and the mouths of rivers etc...
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Markus_g <markus_g at bigpond.com> wrote:
> 4) Add extra way for coastline across Botany Bay after removing coastline
> from Botany Bay.

Oh I see now. If the bay is tagged as natural=bay instead of
natural=coastline, then suddenly the mouth of the bay/river creates a
gap/hole for the coastline. So you say, the artificial line that joins
the two heads lands on either side of the entrance becomes a
coastline, even though the line doesn't have land on one side and sea
on the other.

On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 9:10 PM, Markus_g <markus_g at bigpond.com> wrote:
> 1) Weeney Bay and Quibury Bay are joined together as a way. Need to
> separarate them as separate ways. Easiest way is to create 2 filters on each
> way. IE Weeney Bay and Quibury Bay. Then you can turn each way off and on to
> fix.

Are they? They look seperate to me in JOSM.

> 2) Botany Bay is still set as coastline.

I'm afraid that if I remove the natural=coastline, then mapnik won't
show it up as blue even if it is part of a bay relation. I'm not sure
though.

> 3) Should set Botany Bay relation as mulipolygon. Then make islands inners
> of Botany Bay Multipolygon. Also make other 3 bays as outers.

Okay. If I add the smaller bays as outers (considering they are part
of the larger Botany Bay), then will mapnik render the name in each of
the polygons in the multi polygons, like it does for all the other
multi polygons? I was trying to avoid this, that is why in the second
link I gave to the .osm file I did not set the relation type. So you
think I shouldn't worry about this and use a multipolygon anyway?

>Note: This is of course you are wanting to make the 3 bays part of Botany
bay.

Actually, maybe those bays should not be part of Botany Bay, I guess
it's not universally agreed on. Although there are still other bays
which I think you would consider part of the larger Botany Bay, like
Congwong Bay. The whole point of moving these nodes to areas is that
renders can then choose to show names for large bays on low zooms, and
conversely not show names for very small bays until high zooms. The
same problem arises with bays in rivers, usually the bay is part of
the river, hence you need to start using relations.

Thank you both for the help.



More information about the Talk-au mailing list