[Talk-us-massachusetts] Mapping stone walls

[Greg Troxel]

Tom Parent <tomparent at gmail.com> writes:

> Estabrook Woods in Concord, MA is an OSM example of higher density mapped
> stone walls.
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/42.4933/-71.3429

impressive!

> I'd recommend not making any unnecessary node glue alignments to other
> elements.  For instance, the stone wall might be close to but not exactly
> the parcel boundary (mapped as a separate element, for example, a
> leisure=nature_reserve) as defined by town GIS.  Though, I've seen several
> older survey maps where the stone wall WAS, by survey definition, the
> official boundary.

Agreed.   What I've been doing is putting the wall where it really is,
and sometimes leaving the leisure=nature_reserve as the L3 Parcels
value, and sometimes moving it to just inside the wall, when I believe
the wall is the boundary.   I know this is slightly bogus, but I tend to
draw parcel boundaries just inside (sub meter, even closer) the lines so
that the adjacent ones do not overlap  and can be edited separately.

Before I had RTK GNSS, I felt that L3 parcels was more accurate than my
mapping of walls.  Now sometimes it's iffy and sometimes my data is
better, but usually L3 parcels is meterish.

A long way of agreeing that having separate ways for logically separate
things makes life easier and less confusing as future edits happen.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us-massachusetts/attachments/20210206/91f03ae4/attachment.sig>