[talk-au] Remote mapping of wetlands without local knowledge base on imagery

cleary osm at 97k.com
Mon Feb 24 01:42:49 UTC 2020


 I suspect this might be a mapping competence problem or possibly a problem with the editing tool rather than intent to add incorrect information.  It appears to me that the intent might have been to map the area as a wood but it has been mapped also as swamp (from the nearby relation).

I once created similar problem quite inadvertently. Depending on the editor being used (I prefer Potlatch) relations type=multipolygon can go awry.  When I converted relations to type =boundary +  boundary=natural, everything was much better behaved and I could see what I was mapping.  This might not be the problem in this instance but, in the first instance,  it appears to me that it might be a problem in mapping relations.




On Sun, 23 Feb 2020, at 10:41 PM, Warin wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 
> There has been some remote mapping of the Diamond Beach area based on 
> imagery and descriptive texts. Note the descriptive texts are copyright.
> 
> 
> My contention is that without going there or a correctly licensed source 
> these things cannot be mapped with any certainty, particularly without 
> local knowledge.
> 
> Imagery alone is not enough.
> 
> 
> I refer to;
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/80818669
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/80810033
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/80747704
> 
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/80736708
> 
> 
> 
> I am afraid this mapper falls into the same category as a past remove 
> mapper who mapped rocks as cliffs in the Snowys.
> 
> 
> My inclination is to remove these objects on the basis that they 
> questionable on the stated sources and the lack of local knowledge of 
> the mapper.
> 
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
>



More information about the Talk-au mailing list