Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

sent from a phone > On 21. Jul 2018, at 07:23, Yves wrote: > > Ah, and I have a waterway=lift, fish=yes nearby :) there are also bigger ones: http://www.wna-berlin.de/fotogalerie/bauwerke_anlagen/schleusen_hebewerke/shw_niederfinow/bau_2016/6_juni/nifi_2016-06_013.jpg Cheers, Martin

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

On 21/07/18 15:23, Yves wrote: Ah, and I have a waterway=lift, fish=yes nearby :) And let's not forget fish public transit: http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/fish_passage/about_dams_and_fish/trap_and_haul.html ___ Tagging mailing list

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

Ah, and I have a waterway=lift, fish=yes nearby :) https://www.google.com/search?q=orbe+ascenseur+a+poisson=fr-CH=android-browser=ivsn=lnms=isch=X=0ahUKEwiTx97MuK_cAhVEVywKHbOlCk0Q_AUIESgB=360=518#imgrc=Luw0xusYIWLRUM: Yves Le 21 juillet 2018 00:55:34 GMT+02:00, Graeme Fitzpatrick a écrit :

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

On 20 July 2018 at 23:23, Richard wrote: > > indeed and as they are getting more widespread more variations can be > expected. > One was mentioned near here last week that they have installed a full on lock for fish to bypass a weir. They swim into a chamber through the bottom gate which

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:16:57AM +0200, Yves wrote: > You'd be *very* surprised what shapes fish passes can take. > I don't think it's a good idea to use the waterway key to tell that whatever > feature is intended to be a fish pass. > This one, although man made is definitely a river, that

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

2018-07-19 11:16 GMT+02:00 Yves : > You'd be *very* surprised what shapes fish passes can take. > I don't think it's a good idea to use the waterway key to tell that > whatever feature is intended to be a fish pass. > This one, although man made is definitely a river, that was built as 1) a >

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 08:57:28AM +0100, Javier Sánchez Portero wrote: > Hello > > I personally prefer a few main values in the waterway to define the general > cases and subtags for specific cases like this, of the type of usage = > fiss_pass. If I am in front of an infrastructure of this type,

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

On 17/07/2018 22:04, François Lacombe wrote: Hi all, A discussion has recently started about waterway=fish_pass here : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:waterway%3Dfish_pass Ignoring the wiki, what non-waterway tags are used for fish_pass in OSM? 

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

2018-07-19 9:30 GMT+02:00 Mateusz Konieczny : > In case of waterway=fish_pass I think that a new waterway is OK as > > - it is drastically different from other defined waterways > - is not a navigable waterway > - is not redefining already mapped objects > I'm very surprised to read you in such

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

You'd be *very* surprised what shapes fish passes can take. I don't think it's a good idea to use the waterway key to tell that whatever feature is intended to be a fish pass. This one, although man made is definitely a river, that was built as 1) a fish pass, 2} a whitewater course.

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

sent from a phone > On 19. Jul 2018, at 10:22, Javier Sánchez Portero > wrote: > > Could a fish pass look like a short and very narrow canal like the images in > this pages? > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levada > https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acequia it is not so much about what it

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

sent from a phone > On 19. Jul 2018, at 10:15, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If they are not to be considered part of the waterway key then possibly they > can be added to the key man_made. IMHO they should go into waterway, human transportation is not required for waterway,

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

Actually I'm not familiar with fish passes. Could any one provide more sample images? And one question: Could a fish pass look like a short and very narrow canal like the images in this pages? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levada https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acequia 2018-07-19 9:15 GMT+01:00

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

The 'fish passes' I am familiar with are all man made, they provide fish a way around weirs, dams and locks. They certainly are not intended for human transportation and should not provide a lot of water flow. They are different from spillways, canals and other man made waterways, they are not

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

Hello I personally prefer a few main values in the waterway to define the general cases and subtags for specific cases like this, of the type of usage = fiss_pass. If I am in front of an infrastructure of this type, its physical characteristics will allow me to distinguish if it is a channel,

Re: [Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

In case of waterway=fish_pass I think that a new waterway is OK as - it is drastically different from other defined waterways- is not a navigable waterway - is not redefining already mapped objects 17. Lipiec 2018 23:04 od fl.infosrese...@gmail.com : > Hi

[Tagging] waterway=fish_pass consistency

Hi all, A discussion has recently started about waterway=fish_pass here : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:waterway%3Dfish_pass While writing https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Hydropower_water_supplies it was asked to not clutter waterway=* with spillway since it