From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Available languages — Tag:bay=fjord
Afrikaans Alemannisch aragonés asturianu azərbaycanca Bahasa Indonesia Bahasa Melayu Bân-lâm-gú Basa Jawa Baso Minangkabau bosanski brezhoneg català čeština dansk Deutsch eesti English español Esperanto estremeñu euskara français Frysk Gaeilge Gàidhlig galego Hausa hrvatski Igbo interlingua Interlingue isiXhosa isiZulu íslenska italiano Kiswahili Kreyòl ayisyen kréyòl gwadloupéyen Kurdî latviešu Lëtzebuergesch lietuvių magyar Malagasy Malti Nederlands Nedersaksies norsk bokmål norsk nynorsk occitan Oromoo oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча Plattdüütsch polski português português do Brasil română shqip slovenčina slovenščina Soomaaliga suomi svenska Tiếng Việt Türkçe Vahcuengh vèneto Wolof Yorùbá Zazaki српски / srpski беларуская български қазақша македонски монгол русский тоҷикӣ українська Ελληνικά Հայերեն ქართული नेपाली मराठी हिन्दी অসমীয়া বাংলা ਪੰਜਾਬੀ ગુજરાતી ଓଡ଼ିଆ தமிழ் తెలుగు ಕನ್ನಡ മലയാളം සිංහල ไทย မြန်မာဘာသာ ລາວ ភាសាខ្មែរ ⵜⴰⵎⴰⵣⵉⵖⵜ አማርኛ 한국어 日本語 中文(简体)‎ 吴语 粵語 中文(繁體)‎ ייִדיש עברית اردو العربية پښتو سنڌي فارسی ދިވެހިބަސް
Public-images-osm logo.svg bay = fjord
Geirangerfjord (6-2007).jpg
Long, narrow inlet with steep sides or cliffs, created by glacial erosion.
Used on these elements
may be used on nodesmay be used on waysmay be used on areasuse on relations unspecified
Useful combination
Status: Proposed


See Wikipedia-16px.png fjord on Wikipedia

Note: Fjords can exist both in the sea and in freshwater/lakes.

How to map

The following guidelines are proposed:

Alternative 1:

  • large fjords (such as the 179 km long Wikipedia-16px.png Hardangerfjorden on Wikipedia) should be mapped as area/polygon, following the coastline along land, but using a simplified geometry.
  • smaller fjords should be mapped as area/polygon, either coinciding with the coastline or as a multipolygon using the coastline directly.
  • narrow fjords without branches may be mapped using a way, but an area is preferred.
  • small fjords may be mapped using a single node, but an area is preferred.

Alternative 2:

  • fjords should in general be mapped as linear ways.
  • branches with names may have a separate way connected to the main branch/trunk of the fjord.
  • branches may be collected in a relation, together with the main branch/trunk of the fjord, in order to indicate separate names for each branch but still indicate which fjord they belong to.
  • small fjords may be mapped using a single node, but a linear way is preferred.
  • mapping fjords as areas instead of ways is permitted, but not recommended.

Pros and cons:

  • The "simplified geometry" of large fjords (in Alt.1) will generate some redundancy (since the more detailed coastline is already there).
  • The "simplified geometry" of large fjords (in Alt.1) may make it harder to maintain.
  • Using ways (Alt.2) is faster and easier than making a separate simplified area (Alt.2).
  • Using area (Alt.1) instead of a linear way (Alt.2) gives a better "importance" calculation, e.g. for a (relatively) short and wide fjord compared to a long and narrow one with the same approximate area.
  • Using area (Alt.1) instead of a linear way (Alt.2) makes it possible to detect whether e.g. an island or a fish farm is in a specific fjord.

Common Tagging Mistakes

natural=fjord - If you know places with this tag, verify if it could be tagged with another tag. Automated edits are strongly discouraged unless you really know what you are doing!

See also