[OSM-talk-be] Rendering of stream "Leie" broken

[Glenn Plas]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 28-07-16 21:42, Ruben Maes wrote:
> Hi Glenn
> 
> We can do away with the relation and make sure waterway=riverbank
> is placed everywhere. But this has seemed always strange to me: for
> canals as well? A canal is not a river, and the wiki on
> waterway=riverbank says: "This describes the tagging scheme for
> large rivers", linking to the Wikipedia page for river: "A river is
> a natural flowing watercourse ..."

No , not for canals, when I researched this became pretty clear this
was only meant for rivers.  But the Leie is a river so it's ok here.

> waterway=riverbank is less relation-fiddling and I'm starting to
> see the advantages of that as well.

I had to fix the Zenne so many times that I started to see the merits
of this as well.  I actually just discovered why this wasn't rendering
in the first place, there is some overlaying going on.

Check the relation 2393380 here:
http://analyser.openstreetmap.fr/cgi-bin/index.py

The top 2 yellow markers show you where there is a duplicate way and
it's in the relation:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/423643352

That small piece is preventing it from being rendered decently at the
moment.

If you want to take a stab at fixing it , go ahead. If you want me to
review it later on, give me the headsup and I'll take a look.  A bit
short in time due to closing the books on the fiscal year of 2015.  I
hate fines :)

Glenn


> 
> On donderdag 28 juli 2016 21:19 Glenn Plas wrote:
>> Hey Ruben,
>> 
>>>> I do not see the merit of natural=water scheme at all on a
>>>> river or a canal.  It's a waterway.  imho, there is nothing
>>>> to migrate to. Unless I seriously missed something, the way
>>>> to do it is the way (not the area) is the logical waterway.
>>> 
>>> Both have disadvantages. They are equally hard to maintain.
>> 
>> I disagree here.  Riverbank is easy to maintain for me atleast,
>> they should not be included in any relationship either, they
>> should not be named and they do make sense on rivers where the
>> waterlevel (and/or tides) influence the shape. [1]
>> 
>> The logical riverway still belongs in the the 'waterway tagging
>> scheme' if we can call it like that.
>> 
>> natural=water isn't meant for rivers.  I don't see where this
>> idea is coming from at the moment.  It's used on lakes, still
>> water etc but on a river it's not suited. [2]  The wiki doesn't
>> mention that usage either.
>> 
>> So the logical river would be waterway=river , and that is the
>> part you would put in a waterway relation, the riverbank not.
>> 
>> Keep things simple I would suggest.  Hence the suggestion to
>> delete the relation, probably have to review the tags first so we
>> don't throw away good information.
>> 
>> Now, I'm about to put the kids to bed so I really just scanned
>> the wiki but I've done quite some research on waterway logic,
>> hence why I'm quite convinced.  But always open to suggestions.
>> 
>> Glenn
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Driverbank 
>> [2] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dwater
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing
> list Talk-be at openstreetmap.org 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
> 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=hCmV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----