Talk:Tag:place=ocean
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Why not simplified area/polygon?
Can someone explain why the oceans cannot/should not be mapped as (simplified) polygons? This would make it possible to e.g. tell approximately how large the ocean is, render the name on maps covering just a part of the ocean, and to scale the name depending on the size of the ocean. The same question is relevant for place=sea. --Anderfo (talk) 10:01, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
Strongly disputing this tag
Even number of oceans depends on who and how differentiates them! Deciding this is purely subjective, cultural and there is no good reason to have 5 nodes for one specific division of waters. See for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borders_of_the_oceans about how ocean labelling is subjective Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 13:51, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
- ...so how do you suggest to name the oceans and seas? Just skip all names? I tend to like maps better when they have names, also on oceans, seas, bays, fjords, etc., even if one could argue about exactly where the name should be and how large or visible it should be.--Anderfo (talk) 19:10, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
- Tagging oceans is completely pointless for me. Using just one system is completely subjective and arbitrary, using all at once produces pointless data. Placing nodes is basically "I want this map to render label in this place" and mapping oceans as areas would be massive burden and keep breaking. I have no opinion about seas and I pretty sure that fjords can be mapped but I think that mapping ocean nodes in OSM makes no sense. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:56, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
- I agree that tagging them as nodes is useless. That's why I would suggest "simplified polygons" (e.g. 50-200 nodes or something like that) instead, as for seas, bays and fjords. That would make it e.g. possible to render the name on a map showing just a part of the ocean, or to tell which ocean a sea or bay is part of, and the "massive burden" of rendering or processing it would not be that massive, I believe.--Anderfo (talk) 08:56, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
- Tagging oceans is completely pointless for me. Using just one system is completely subjective and arbitrary, using all at once produces pointless data. Placing nodes is basically "I want this map to render label in this place" and mapping oceans as areas would be massive burden and keep breaking. I have no opinion about seas and I pretty sure that fjords can be mapped but I think that mapping ocean nodes in OSM makes no sense. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:56, 6 February 2019 (UTC)