[talk-au] Breaking a beach?
graemefitz1 at gmail.com
Wed Sep 15 06:38:48 UTC 2021
On Wed, 15 Sept 2021 at 13:48, Andrew Harvey <andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com>
> It's a tricky one, and I would say there is no perfect solution here.
> Going by the one feature, one OSM element guide
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element you can
> rightly consider a single natural=beach for the whole length, but
> simultaneously a different named beach for each named section.
Yep, that's one issue with it.
What I did for Bate Bate, in Cronulla, NSW was to split into sections and
> have a natural=beach for each section, eg
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/-34.0444/151.1637. They are drawn
> as different ways but shared/snapped nodes where they meet.
Which is what I was thinking, with the other option being delete the name
from the full beach & just add named beach nodes to each separate area.
There are other possible solutions with multipolygons or relations,
Scary stuff! :-)
but I think overall just doing each section as a new way with natural=beach
> and it's own name is best.
That may be the neatest way - just delete the whole thing & re-do it all.
In iD you can add nodes along the way and split it, unfortunately iD tries
> to be too smart and ends up converting it to a multipolygon relation, which
> you then need to remove and retain the tags on the way. JOSM works much
> better in this regard, but it's still possible, just messy to do in iD. You
> can turn off Boundaries under Map Data > Map Features which unclutters the
> map a bit more (though some ways you won't be able to move).
I've given it a go by doing this & you're right, it's messy with hiding
boundaries, then un-hiding them so you can fix the alignment. I'll check to
see how it looks tomorrow after things have updated & find out if I've
broken anything! The delete & re-do is certainly sounding the easiest way
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-au