Is there tools to help fixing landuse (or landcover) overlaps? Here is an example:
osm.org/way/436248091 As described here:
Forest with lake (One outer and one inner ring) If i try to fix this with JOSM, only way 436248091 will be downloaded and displayed. asked 29 Mar '19, 03:15 adrienandrem |
If you zoom out enough in JOSM, you will find way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/436800951#map=12/4.2834/-52.0013 that represents the surrounding forest. I doubt you can do that in iD. answered 29 Mar '19, 06:25 escada This is the way to do it manually yes. The question is about helper tools, like plugins, for this use case.
(02 Apr '19, 00:49)
adrienandrem
this is a problem with natural=water on a landuse in the Carto CSS rendering. There is not always problem with 2 overlapping polygons. Furthermore, the question remains whether the lake is part of the forest or not. IMHO, it is part of the forest, it is not part of the tree covered area though. So should it really be cut out of the forest polygon ?
(02 Apr '19, 12:32)
escada
Thank you for pointing out that a natural=* overlapping a landuse=* might be justified. I hadn't spotted the landuse key in this case. But as natural=wood describes better what is really there, i corrected the map.
(08 Apr '19, 00:35)
adrienandrem
|
Your last comment indicates that you are interested in a general/algorithmic solution of the issue. With a high probability you will not find any editors with such function. There are many reasons to that. The outer polygon might be very large, the lake polygon is over the borders of several neighbouring larger forest polygons, then the opposite – a forest polygon over a lake or river polygon, a generalized case of the former cases, just to mention some. But it is not the end. Assume there was a hole under the lake in your example but the borders do not coincide. So, the problem starts long before we come to the issue you have met. answered 03 Apr '19, 17:59 sanser What i am looking for are functionalities to help the mapper gather information,
as relevant as possible. N.B.: limiting overlaps to A.contains(B) would be good enough.
(08 Apr '19, 02:23)
adrienandrem
|