Hi muramototomoya:

These objects are circles with 6500 m radii for the
new Hokkaido Shinkansen under construction to Saporro.
The Shinkansen has a nominal 6500 m curve minimum
radius, and fortunately, the entire Shinkansen project
appears to use this curve dimension. I used about 22
circles to construct the curves for the railway
project. I am currently also aligning the tangents
between these curves.

thanks,
Baden

Hola Viajero:

The Alberta - B.C. border is defined by Canadian Government Statute stating that the interprovincial boundary follows the height of land (natural border) from the International Border (Waterton) to the 120th degree meridian, and then along that meridian to the N.W.T border.

The only parts which do not follow geography are in the mountain passes, where markers and carins were placed to ensure a visible and discernible boundary. The Interprovincial Boundary Commission surveyed the border from 1913, and is responsible for its demarcation. R.W. Cautley, the Alberta appointee, surveyed and placed monuments in the mountain passes, and Arthur Wheeler, the B.C. appointee, remotely (photogrammetrically) surveyed the remaining continental divide. The Commission occasionally clears the cutlines between the markers, so usually the border is easily distinguished on imagery.

"Local government sources" do not have any authority determining nor surveying the border. AFAIK, there are no maps which officially define the border. The reason you probably found agreement in the Alberta maps, is that all the Alberta maps probably originate from the same provincial data set.

thanks,
Baden

Hi Viajero:

I cannot find exactly what you changed.

Unlike most people, I have extensively investigated the interprovincial boundary. The current (official) mapping is extremely erroneous. The USGS topo maps are not only very clear, helpful and usually the most accurate, they also include the boundary markers and their labels.

I not sure why you would contemplate excluding U.S.A. based mapping, as OSM already uses Bing (secondary source), Yahoo (ditto), Mapbox, ESRI, DG-Maxar, etc. There are also large global tracts of OSM mapping that are based on U.S.A. government sources, and I cannot see über nationalism playing a constructive role by denigrating their value.

thanks,
Baden

Hi kreuzschnabel:

This circle is used a guide to help align the
adjoining railway route, the name is the radius.

I duplicated and moved some extra circles and
temporarily assigned them as "power lines", to enable
measuring and locating them.

thanks,
Baden

Hi Martin:

This circle is used a guide to help align the
adjoining railway route, the name is the radius.

thanks,
Baden

I guess I should state it has been corrected.

Baden

thanks!
{:-)

Hi Freebeer:

Thanks for the tip! What I did for the "new" section you restored, was just enclose it and copy of the tags from the previous (southern) Athabasca River section I separated from the Snaring section.

I am still not 100% clear on the proper or best way to tag these rivers. My understanding is that the 'ways' have minimal tagging (line?) and the parent 'relation' has the complete attributes. I will need to review all these, and also convert all the inners, but it may take awhile.

thanks,
Baden

Hola Viajero:

I think it is important to separate form from function.

Examples are "concrete", where highways, sidewalks, and buildings can all be concrete, or "grass", where gardens, sport pitches, and savanna can all be grass.

The material substance should be secondary to the primary descriptor.

From my understanding, "shingles" are consistent rounded pebbles usually associated with beaches, where wave action has removed finer particles.:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shingle_beach

From my experience, alluvial deposits run the gamut from large boulders (and even exposed bedrock) and gravel on fast flowing upstream sections to fine clay and sand in slower flowing downstream sections. The latter are often impossible to walk on (gumbo). Braided streams tend to be the former, and are usually an amalgamation or stratae of varying sizes. I very rarely (never?) have encountered pure "shingles" which would warrant that material descriptor. I would describe these braided channels near Field as mixed "gravel".

I see the ultimate objective as describing a riverbed function only immersed during spring freshets and occasional floods, and devoid of permanent vegetation. Braided streams and alluvial fans are often never entirely immersed, and result from meandering stream action. "Waterway=Riverbank", and "Intermittent=yes" seem to get rendered appropriately in Mapnik, separating main streams and permanent water from bare riverbed. "Natural=Riverbed" may more accurately help separate permanent channels from intermittently immersed non-vegetated (forested?) areas.

thanks,
Baden

Hola Viajero:

I've looked at this a lot, and it seemed a little challenging. "water" and "intermittent" seemed to provide an improved rendering. After your note, I searched some more, and this seems to be the ideal solution:

osm.wiki/Tag%3Anatural%3Driverbed

I am trying it out to see what results.

The river bottom itself can be any of an amalgamation of alluvial deposits. As it states:

especially natural=sand, natural=shingle, natural=bare_rock, natural=mud, natural=scrub - specific tags for types of surface/landcover which are often found in riverbeds.

thanks,
Baden

Viajero:

Thanks! I didn't want to do anything until after the reversion, as the possibility existed that it all could be reverted.

Freebeer:

I look at OSM as a pastime like gardening, unfortunately gardening doesn't seem to be as addictive nor time consuming (wasting) as OSM. {:-)

thanks,
Baden

Hi Freebeer:

Thanks so much for your assistance!

I now have my work cut out for me, as these braided rivers are a confusing mess, on the ground, and on 'paper'. I wish Canvec didn't have all the little streamlets, as they are transitory, as often are the main channels.

thanks again,
Baden

Hi FreeBeer:

Would it be possible for you to correct this error, as I am not able to?

thanks,
Baden

Hi Freebeer:

I have very limited competence in investigating these things, however, from what I could ascertain, the deficiency only came to my attention after the whole river section disappeared on Mapnik. I have no recollection of recently seeing that section when I was modify it, however, it still exists on OpenTopoMap, so I can only surmise it was due to my recent actions.

Looking at Relation: Snaring River (6447166), I can see that I was the first person to touch it since three years ago. relation/6447166/history#map=11/53.0260/-118.0129 Changeset: 73230469 covers the affected area to Brule Lake, so I am guessing this may be where the deletion occurred.

As far as the "unholy mess" mess goes, I took on a project that I knew was risky, and it turned out to be more complex than anticipated. Besides having a actual complex braided river system, the OSM riverbank, water, streams, and woods are all congruent or overlapping, and difficult to identify and separate. The Canvec data is also extremely erroneous.

thanks,
Baden

Hi Freebeer:

Thanks for your response.

Ideally, it would be preferable to add or restore the missing river way only from the Snaring mouth to Brule Lake without impacting the subsequent changes. I could then manually change the isolated islands over to the new Athabasca River relation, as I did with the upper Athabasca River.

Practically, I realise that this may not be possible, so a reversion may be required.

In hindsight, the better way to spit this up, would have been to rename the relation "Snaring River" to "Athabasca River", and then split the actual Snaring River off, and deal with that smaller and more manageable relation separately.

thanks,
Baden

Does "Hawk Mountain Route" actually have bicycle access?

Is there any way to reduce the amount of nodes on this route?

thanks,
Baden

It looks like I probably inadvertently deleted a whole section of river bank [Relation: Snaring River (6447166)] a few days back on the Athabasca River between Snaring river and Brule Lake. It was incorrectly named "Snaring River". The transgression may have been in Changeset: 73236201.

I was in the process of correcting the incorrect name by splitting the rivers (ways) at the Snaring mouth. I made a new Relation: Athabasca River (9905661) and renamed and added the upper Athabasca River between Snaring River mouth and Jasper.

Baden

It looks like I probably inadvertently deleted a whole section of river bank [Relation: Snaring River (6447166)] a few days back on the Athabasca River between Snaring river and Brule Lake. It was incorrectly named "Snaring River". The transgression may have been in Changeset: 73236201.

I was in the process of correcting the incorrect name by splitting the rivers (ways) at the Snaring mouth. I made a new Relation: Athabasca River (9905661) and renamed and added the upper Athabasca River between Snaring River mouth and Jasper.

Baden

It looks like I probably inadvertently deleted a whole section of river bank [Relation: Snaring River (6447166)] a few days back on the Athabasca River between Snaring river and Brule Lake. It was incorrectly named "Snaring River". The transgression may have been in Changeset: 73236201.

I was in the process of correcting the incorrect name by splitting the rivers (ways) at the Snaring mouth. I made a new Relation: Athabasca River (9905661) and renamed and added the upper Athabasca River between Snaring River mouth and Jasper.

Baden

The Oyen subdivision looks like it has been reinstated. https://www.cn.ca/-/media/Files/About-CN/Company-Information/three-year-plan-en.pdf

Does anyone (Pnrrth?) have some updated information?