[Talk-GB] OS Boundaries
lester at lsces.co.uk
Sun Apr 25 15:29:06 BST 2010
Dave F. wrote:
> Lester Caine wrote:
>> Dave F. wrote:
>>> Lester Caine wrote:
>>>> But well mapped rivers don't have ways down their middle
>>> Care to expand on that please?
>> MOST rivers are now being mapped fully and so are areas rather than a
>> line with some arbitrary width. So there is no 'way' corresponding to
>> some arbitrary mid point to the river ...
> I contest your assertation that 'most' is accurate, but that's another
Where new mapping is being carried out ... most of that work is to provide river
data in the now prefered format ....
> There should be a way to indicate both the direction of flow, bit also
> the route, where applicable, for boat routes. To show that it goes
> through a lock rather than a weir for example.
> & also for boundaries, of course.
The way associated with a river provides the direction of flow only. There is no
requirement that it should follow a boat route, or boundary. THOSE need to be
mapped with additional ways, since the river details can not be assumed to be
correct in either case?
>>>> Even more important, we need a way to maintain historic information
>>>> such as '1995 boundary' where later boundaries are different.
>>> Why do we need to do that?
>>> I delete out of date data.
>>> Please explain why you think we should keep it?
>> Just because YOU are not using the data does not entitle you to delete
> And because you might want to use it doesn't mean it should be kept in
> the database of a *current* map.
> I wasn't suggesting that because I do something a certain way it was
> correct, just that I do it.
> However, is this being done by others? I've yet to come across it in use.
> Do you have a link to a wiki page?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:start_date ( and end_date )
>> The whole reason *I* am interested in OSM is as a base for documenting
>> my genealogical data. Being able to check a location at some point in
>> time is important and while many of the attempts to get time data
>> properly tagged have not been accepted, simple information like
>> 'constructed=1980' would at least allow maps to be rendered to provide
>> a view in a particular year. ONCE that is possible, then the related
>> boundary information is also important.
>>> If a footpath gets moved do you think I should still show a way & mark
>>> it as 'this is where it used to go'?
>> 'closed=2007' makes perfect sense to me. People then coming back to an
>> area that they walked 30 years ago would then see why they can't
>> follow the same route today?
> How far back do you suggest going? AFAIS, we are up to our necks in
> current data let alone trawling through OoD data.
> I live in a old Roman city, if I had the patience & time to go back that
> far, the database would be unreadable & unusable with so much info
> layered on top of each other.
The current unorganized tangle of data would only be improved by adding the
correct start_date ( and end_date ) tags to that data. In the UK we are
fortunate to have fairly accurate data on when roads were created, and features
added. 'start_date' should be a part of every historic object placed on the map.
The problem is that the FORMAT for that simple data differs from tag to tag,
rather than providing a single standard that higher level tools can use :(
>> Just like 'micromapping', historic information may not be of interest
>> to everybody, but moving forward, why would you NOT want to maintain
>> data that has already been mapped. We just need agreement on how it is
>> maintained - since the 'history' of object edits is simply no
>> substitute for mapping historic data.
Lester Caine - G8HFL
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk//
Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php
More information about the Talk-GB