On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 16:21:23 -0500 Eric Ladner wrote: > On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 2:19 PM, malenki > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I won't use a tag which I don't consider useful. > > For me it is: > > waterway=* == flowing water > > natural=water == not flowing (though the most water bodies have > > some current) > > > > > Tags water=pond or water=lake may not be immediately view-able on the > map, but they do convey information (assuming there's also a > natural=water tag on the feature). > > water=lake - large natural bodies of water > water=reservoir - large man-made bodies of water > water=pond - small man-made bodies of water > > The only ambiguity is the vagueness of small vs. large, and local > naming conventions (something is named Lake Blah, when it is > technically a reservoir because it's man-made - Big Creek Lake in > southern Alabama, for example).
I disagree. For reservoir, there is already landuse=reservoir. To know the size of a certain feature it would be more useful to derive the size from its actual geometry contained in OSM instead relying on a fuzzy description. Or the person who wants to see how big the object is just looks at a map where natural=water is rendered… > Personally, I'd vote for removing the double tagged water=lake;pond > since it's redundant and should be one or the other, not both, and > ensuring that each feature had a natural=water tag. ok _______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
