when navigating it might be helpful to know what high points are around such as tall towers fir water or grain, wind mills and turbines,Church steeples high rise builds, (in area where uncommon) and communication masts. Ideally with a height, how could these be marked on the map

asked 23 Jan '11, 14:08

andy%20mackey's gravatar image

andy mackey
11.8k74126261
accept rate: 4%


Windmills have their own tag, as do towers and buildings.

permanent link

answered 23 Jan '11, 21:43

Paul%20Johnson's gravatar image

Paul Johnson
2.9k143056
accept rate: 10%

6

And it's possible to add a height tag to all these objects.

(24 Jan '11, 01:50) Tordanik
1

I've always been bothered by these tags, since you really want to tag "this is visible from there", so you can say "pass a power plant chimney to the left, and directly turn right." turn left when you see a tower to the left. But this is hard to do in a sane manner.

(25 Jan '11, 12:11) emj
2

Nope you don't want that. You want the computer to figure that out on its own. Yes this needs a DEM and is hard. But if you do it automatically you can do it in whatever output language you want. You can compute the output under the influence of fog, darkness, new building and whatnot.

(25 Jan '11, 16:02) petschge

for me emj's comment is correct, if a map is printed and used with a compass you need these reference or aiming marks plus there heights on the map. Thank you all for other answers and comments

(10 Mar '11, 22:46) andy mackey

decided tick the answer as its correct I suppose. I'll have to put something in the wish list for high visible points on the map

(16 Mar '11, 11:47) andy mackey

British Admiralty Charts use the term "conspic" (conspicuous) for certain charted objects that are fairly readily identifiable and may be useful for marine navigation. Maybe a tag visibility=conspicuous with height=*, where known, would be an option. (There is already a trail_visibility tag.)

The problem with this approach is that in some cases the object may only be conspicuous from certain directions, e.g. due to the surrounding landform, and it is also subjective: a clump of woodland in an otherwise arable landscape is conspicuous. Do you tag this?

When I'm navigating I use my judgement whether I can likely see an object or not, e.g. Radio Masts; Churches with Towers, Spires; Windmills; Follies; etc. and so I think that using a visibility tag like this is unnecessary, particularly as it is subjective and possibly variable.

permanent link

answered 16 Mar '11, 14:39

vagabond's gravatar image

vagabond
1954510
accept rate: 0%

Your answer
toggle preview

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:

×50
×6
×2

question asked: 23 Jan '11, 14:08

question was seen: 3,953 times

last updated: 16 Mar '11, 14:39

powered by OSQA