On 19/02/19 14:03, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote:
On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 12:45, Warin <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
The wiki has no units for depth, I would suggest these be the same as
height.
Makes sense - default as m's, but can be marked as ft depending on
local standards
There are also problems with estimation and variability.
Some are using the tilde mark '~' to indicate 'approximately'.
Some are using '-' for between eg depth=0.5-0.7 for between 0.5
and 0.7.
Any opposition or better ideas???
Not opposition, but for tidal areas, isn't this going to have the same
problems of whether you mark the "coastline" at the high- or low-tide
line?
You'd probably need something along the lines of
Average_low-tide=0.8
Average_high-tide=1.9
The depth at the high tide mark would usually go from 0 to some negative
number. and average would be a negative number.
The depth at the low tide mark would usually go from 0 to some positive
number. So it could be mapped depth=0-1
I would not map those. But it does raise the problem of using'-' for
'between' if there is any negative number to be used.
Is using 'to' an acceptable method to represent 'between'?
This comes out of the river navigation problem when I looked at what
people were doing for variable depths.
--------------
For tidal or seasonal etc I would only tag the expected range .. thus
Average_low-tide=0.8
Average_high-tide=1.9
would become
depth=0.8-1.9 (or 0.8to1.9)
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
