Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Andrew Harvey]

On 22 March 2017 at 18:53, Dave Swarthout  wrote:
> You might use waterway as the main tag to prevent confusion with the
> top-level tag of water=*
>
> Either waterway=pool (TagInfo: 26 uses), or waterway=stream_pool, would be
> better than water=stream_pool. I still think it better to avoid using the
> word stream in the value because then a pool on a river would have these two
> tags, which might look strange to some people:
> waterway=river
> waterway=stream_pool
>
> This tagging seems more "logical" IMO:
> waterway=river
> waterway=pool
>
> The existing waterway=pool objects seem to be either small ponds where one
> can bathe or some sort of natural=basin.

On 22 March 2017 at 20:24, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
> I would prefer water over waterway as a key, because this is about 
> areas/polygons, for which we typically use natural=water and subtags. This 
> would also allow to keep waterway=riverbank for the whole stream-/river-area 
> (which is so far the only significant exception where waterway is used for 
> areas and not as a linear graph model).
> I would be ok with leisure as well, although this is mostly used for 
> artificial features so far, and there might raise some confusion with 
> "ordinary" swimming pools.

I agree, these are a "body of water" along the waterway. In the ones
I've mapped so far you have the waterway feature usually as a linear
way and then these water=stream_pool areas over that stream way.

If you've mapped the waterway as an area, why not have these as
separate water=stream_pool areas?

On 23 March 2017 at 05:22, Mark Bradley  wrote:
> To categorize these pools as a subcategory of leisure seems shortsighted to 
> me, because that may not be the only use for them, just as not all swimming 
> pools are for leisure.  I would prefer they be tagged as a value of water or 
> waterway, instead of inferring they are only for leisure.

Agreed.

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Mark Bradley]

> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 10:24:39 +0100
> From: Martin Koppenhoefer 
> To: daveswarth...@gmail.com, "Tag discussion, strategy and related
>   tools" 
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] water=pool
> Message-ID: 
> 
> 
> 
> sent from a phone
> 
> > On 22 Mar 2017, at 08:53, Dave Swarthout  wrote:
> >
> > Either waterway=pool (TagInfo: 26 uses), or waterway=stream_pool, would be
> better than water=stream_pool.
> 
> 
> I would prefer water over waterway as a key, because this is about 
> areas/polygons, for
> which we typically use natural=water and subtags. This would also allow to 
> keep
> waterway=riverbank for the whole stream-/river-area (which is so far the only
> significant exception where waterway is used for areas and not as a linear 
> graph
> model).
> I would be ok with leisure as well, although this is mostly used for 
> artificial features so
> far, and there might raise some confusion with "ordinary" swimming pools.
> 
> 
> cheers,
> Martin


To categorize these pools as a subcategory of leisure seems shortsighted to me, 
because that may not be the only use for them, just as not all swimming pools 
are for leisure.  I would prefer they be tagged as a value of water or 
waterway, instead of inferring they are only for leisure.

Mark



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 22 Mar 2017, at 08:53, Dave Swarthout  wrote:
> 
> Either waterway=pool (TagInfo: 26 uses), or waterway=stream_pool, would be 
> better than water=stream_pool.


I would prefer water over waterway as a key, because this is about 
areas/polygons, for which we typically use natural=water and subtags. This 
would also allow to keep waterway=riverbank for the whole stream-/river-area 
(which is so far the only significant exception where waterway is used for 
areas and not as a linear graph model).
I would be ok with leisure as well, although this is mostly used for artificial 
features so far, and there might raise some confusion with "ordinary" swimming 
pools.


cheers,
Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Dave Swarthout]

You might use waterway as the main tag to prevent confusion with the
top-level tag of water=*

Either waterway=pool (TagInfo: 26 uses), or waterway=stream_pool, would be
better than water=stream_pool. I still think it better to avoid using the
word stream in the value because then a pool on a river would have these
two tags, which might look strange to some people:
waterway=river
waterway=stream_pool

This tagging seems more "logical" IMO:
waterway=river
waterway=pool

The existing waterway=pool objects seem to be either small ponds where one
can bathe or some sort of natural=basin.

Dave



On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:32 PM, John Willis  wrote:

>
> On Mar 13, 2017, at 5:22 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer 
> wrote:
>
> I'd rather use water=stream_pool without the lake deviation, but then it
> still is in conflict with water=river. Are these actual features anyway, or
> are they simply the wider parts of the river?
>
>
> +1 for stream_pool.
>
> The features they are talking about are usually where a normally shallow
> stream feeds into topography (man made or natural)  that creates a much
> deeper/wide/slower moving section of the tiny stream than “normal",
> allowing someone to reasonably submerge their body, or jump into. this is
> an “attraction” of the stream, usually used by people hiking or playing in
> the water. Some of them may be locally famous.
>
> Ah!
>
> I would put these under leisure. they are only useful for some kind of
> leisure activity.
>
> If I was interested in tagging the features of a certain spot for campers
> or backpackers to set up a tent, (like micromapping a part of a park), then
> mapping these might be useful, as you might choose one location over
> another based on having this pool available.
>
> having water=pool sounds like a recipe for incorrectly tagged swimming
> pools.
>
> Javbw
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>


-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[John Willis]

> On Mar 13, 2017, at 5:22 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  
> wrote:
> 
> I'd rather use water=stream_pool without the lake deviation, but then it 
> still is in conflict with water=river. Are these actual features anyway, or 
> are they simply the wider parts of the river?

+1 for stream_pool.  

The features they are talking about are usually where a normally shallow stream 
feeds into topography (man made or natural)  that creates a much 
deeper/wide/slower moving section of the tiny stream than “normal", allowing 
someone to reasonably submerge their body, or jump into. this is an 
“attraction” of the stream, usually used by people hiking or playing in the 
water. Some of them may be locally famous. 

Ah! 

I would put these under leisure. they are only useful for some kind of leisure 
activity.

If I was interested in tagging the features of a certain spot for campers or 
backpackers to set up a tent, (like micromapping a part of a park), then 
mapping these might be useful, as you might choose one location over another 
based on having this pool available. 

having water=pool sounds like a recipe for incorrectly tagged swimming pools. 

Javbw___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Andrew Harvey]

Thanks for all the input. There are mixed viewpoints, but I'm leaning
towards using and documenting on the wiki water=stream_pool as "A
small and usually deep collection of fresh water, supplied by a
spring, or occurring along a stream or river. Water velocity in the
pool is typically much lower than the watercourse. Frequently found
below a waterfall."

On 11 March 2017 at 20:24, Andrew Harvey  wrote:
> I'm looking for a tag for "A small and rather deep collection of (usually)
> fresh water, as one supplied by a spring, or occurring in the course of a
> stream;" https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pool#English also like
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_pool.
>
> They come in all shapes and sizes but are usually part of a stream/creek
> where it is deep enough for water to collect there.
>
> Some photo examples:
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/32171903253/in/datetaken-public/
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/32986671125/in/datetaken-public/
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/25031837975/in/datetaken-public/
>
> It's not a lake which is much larger.
>
> I don't think it's right to use water=pond, which is "man-made in most
> cases", and seems to be more commonly used for places in a park where you
> find ducks, often with lots of vegetation.
>
> water=pool seems like the best option. Here is Australia at least a lot of
> them have a name like "... Pool". But since it's undocumented I'm not sure
> what the 226 current uses of the tag are.
>
> What's the process for working out if this is the best choice, and if it
> turns out to be documenting it on the wiki?

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Richard]

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 06:33:13AM +0700, Dave Swarthout wrote:
> I agree about the tag water=pool. Potentially very misleading.
> 
> Stream_pool seems okay, or perhaps waterway_pool to avoid a possible
> semantic conflict when applying the tag to rivers. Are there plans to add
> "riffles" as well? A riffle is, in American English at least, a fisherman's
> term for a shallower place in a river or stream where the water runs faster
> than normal. A riffle is akin to a rapid, only much smaller and slower
> running.  Folks fish the pools and riffles for trout, salmon, etc.

aren't the riffles very variable over time?

Richard

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Richard]

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:21:17AM +, ael wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 10:40:24PM +0100, Richard wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 08:24:35PM +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> > when using natural=water + water=pool they would become distinct (though 
> > adjacent)
> > water body from the river/creek which they are part of which is not quite 
> > right.
> > They are part of the river with special properties.
> > 
> > So perhaps
> >  natural=water + water=river
> >  + stream_pool=yes
> 
> Good point, but why introduce a new term "stream_pool"? Why not just
> pool=yes?

for me pool can mean just too many things, stream_pool isn't even one of
the first ones which I would think of.

Richard

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 16 Mar 2017, at 00:33, Dave Swarthout  wrote:
> 
> I agree about the tag water=pool. Potentially very misleading.


for fountains natural=water is/was the suggested tagging for the water 
surfaces, so any other water tagging will hardly be more misleading (if you 
read "natural" as strictly natural, like in mother earth).

at least this is what people have been reading at 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag%3Aamenity%3Dfountain&type=revision&diff=1222609&oldid=1212273
(so was I told by the carto-osm team some years ago). Not sure why this 
reference to natural =water was removed, at least I don't recall any discussion 
on this list 


cheers,
Martin ___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Dave Swarthout]

I agree about the tag water=pool. Potentially very misleading.

Stream_pool seems okay, or perhaps waterway_pool to avoid a possible
semantic conflict when applying the tag to rivers. Are there plans to add
"riffles" as well? A riffle is, in American English at least, a fisherman's
term for a shallower place in a river or stream where the water runs faster
than normal. A riffle is akin to a rapid, only much smaller and slower
running.  Folks fish the pools and riffles for trout, salmon, etc.

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:24 AM, Mark Bradley 
wrote:

> > I think just "water=pool" is a bit short and potentially misleading with
> other types of
> > pools (reflecting pool, swimming pool, salt pool, ...).
> >
>
>
> As far as I know, all these types of pools are man-made, not natural, so
> I'm not sure how
> misleading "water=pool" would be.
>
>
> > If you don't need a new tag, I would go for natural=water water=lake
> (and let the size
> > and position of the feature show that it is a small body of water on a
> river) After all, it
> > is a kind of lake, only much smaller ;) The various definitions to
> distiguish lake/pond
> > are quite messy, I do not want to go there.
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pond#Technical_definitions
> > Please also note that in current OSM wiki: water=lake "should be
> considered default
> > for natural=water, when no water or other descriptive tags are
> specified".
> > I think it is good enough for the kind of semantics we are trying to
> achieve in OSM.
> >
> >
> > Otherwise, if I cannot convince you with that alone, at least expand to
> "stream_pool",
> > like:
> >
> > natural=water
> > water=lake
> > lake=stream_pool
> >
> > or
> >
> > natural=water
> > water=stream_pool
> >
> >
> > -- althio
>
>
> I like
>
> natural=water
> water=stream_pool
>
> as in your second example above.
>
>
> Mark Bradley
>
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>



-- 
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Mark Bradley]

> I think just "water=pool" is a bit short and potentially misleading with 
> other types of
> pools (reflecting pool, swimming pool, salt pool, ...).
> 


As far as I know, all these types of pools are man-made, not natural, so I'm 
not sure how
misleading "water=pool" would be.


> If you don't need a new tag, I would go for natural=water water=lake (and let 
> the size
> and position of the feature show that it is a small body of water on a river) 
> After all, it
> is a kind of lake, only much smaller ;) The various definitions to distiguish 
> lake/pond
> are quite messy, I do not want to go there.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pond#Technical_definitions
> Please also note that in current OSM wiki: water=lake "should be considered 
> default
> for natural=water, when no water or other descriptive tags are specified".
> I think it is good enough for the kind of semantics we are trying to achieve 
> in OSM.
> 
> 
> Otherwise, if I cannot convince you with that alone, at least expand to 
> "stream_pool",
> like:
> 
> natural=water
> water=lake
> lake=stream_pool
> 
> or
> 
> natural=water
> water=stream_pool
> 
> 
> -- althio


I like

natural=water
water=stream_pool

as in your second example above.


Mark Bradley



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Andrew Harvey]

On 11 March 2017 at 23:54, Thilo Haug  wrote:
> in my opinion, this combination is describing it best :
> natural=water
> water=pond

I don't like this, as I feel pond is "more commonly used for places in
a park where you find ducks, often with lots of vegetation", and the
water would cover a larger area, and not be flowing as much as a pool.



On 12 March 2017 at 01:21, ael  wrote:
>> in my opinion, this combination is describing it best :
>> natural=water
>> water=pond
>
> As a native English speaker, these are not ponds. Pools are the natural
> description, as already suggested. So just add natural=water, water=pool
> to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:water, and tag accordingly.
> The existing tags do not cover these pools.

That was the plan, but I wanted to see what others thought and see if
there was a consensus first.

On 13 March 2017 at 19:14, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
>> On 12 Mar 2017, at 16:35, althio  wrote:
>> If you don't need a new tag, I would go for
>> natural=water
>> water=lake
>> (and let the size and position of the feature show that it is a small
>> body of water on a river)
>> After all, it is a kind of lake, only much smaller ;)
> no, it's not a kind of lake similar like 3 trees can never be a kind of 
> forest. Both a lake and a forest require a certain size in order to develop 
> the ecosystem that characterizes them.

I agree, a lake and this kind of stream pool are fundamentally
different. natural=water is the common element already.

On 13 March 2017 at 19:22, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:
> I'd rather use water=stream_pool without the lake deviation, but then it 
> still is in conflict with water=river. Are these actual features anyway, or 
> are they simply the wider parts of the river?

My view is that a river has enough flow and is wide enough tag as an
area with waterway=riverbank or water=river. So you wouldn't really
get these pools on a river.

A stream on the otherhand might only be able to be tagged as a linear
way in most sections as the water doesn't collect, except for a pool
along the lake. (ie. a pool / stream pool). Further the pool usually
isn't flowing in the same way as the creek, so I don't think it makes
sense to tag as a stream area (a stream area, would be mostly rock,
not water).

I'm not fussed with water=stream_pool or water=pool. I agree with
althio that water=stream_pool is more explicit, and water=pool could
be confused with a reflecting pool, swimming pool,

On 11 March 2017 at 20:24, Andrew Harvey  wrote:
> I'm looking for a tag for "A small and rather deep collection of (usually)
> fresh water, as one supplied by a spring, or occurring in the course of a
> stream;" https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pool#English also like
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_pool.
>
> They come in all shapes and sizes but are usually part of a stream/creek
> where it is deep enough for water to collect there.
>
> Some photo examples:
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/32171903253/in/datetaken-public/
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/32986671125/in/datetaken-public/
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/25031837975/in/datetaken-public/
>
> It's not a lake which is much larger.
>
> I don't think it's right to use water=pond, which is "man-made in most
> cases", and seems to be more commonly used for places in a park where you
> find ducks, often with lots of vegetation.
>
> water=pool seems like the best option. Here is Australia at least a lot of
> them have a name like "... Pool". But since it's undocumented I'm not sure
> what the 226 current uses of the tag are.
>
> What's the process for working out if this is the best choice, and if it
> turns out to be documenting it on the wiki?

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[ael]

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 10:40:24PM +0100, Richard wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 08:24:35PM +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> when using natural=water + water=pool they would become distinct (though 
> adjacent)
> water body from the river/creek which they are part of which is not quite 
> right.
> They are part of the river with special properties.
> 
> So perhaps
>  natural=water + water=river
>  + stream_pool=yes

Good point, but why introduce a new term "stream_pool"? Why not just
pool=yes?

ael


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[ael]

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 09:39:51PM -0500, John F. Eldredge wrote:
> At least in American English, there is an intermediate term, pond, for a
> body of water smaller than a lake but larger than a mere wide spot in a
> stream.  Ponds can be man-made or natural.

But in British English, ponds are generally static. That is the term is
usually used when there is little or no flow.  

ael


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[John F. Eldredge]

At least in American English, there is an intermediate term, pond, for a 
body of water smaller than a lake but larger than a mere wide spot in a 
stream.  Ponds can be man-made or natural.




On March 13, 2017 4:19:47 AM Martin Koppenhoefer  
wrote:



2017-03-13 10:13 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:


If (when, in Australia) the river stops flowing, these pools become a
water oasis for all.
And if the pool dries up you can dig there for water, if needed.




so where's the distinction to lake? How much is the water flow reduced
there, can you still perceive you're in a river, or is it more like a still
water body with water flowing in and out?

Cheers,
Martin



--
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Richard]

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 08:24:35PM +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> I'm looking for a tag for "A small and rather deep collection of (usually)
> fresh water, as one supplied by a spring, or occurring in the course of a
> stream;" https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pool#English also like
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_pool.
...
...
...
> water=pool seems like the best option. Here is Australia at least a lot of
> them have a name like "... Pool". But since it's undocumented I'm not sure
> what the 226 current uses of the tag are.

when using natural=water + water=pool they would become distinct (though 
adjacent)
water body from the river/creek which they are part of which is not quite right.
They are part of the river with special properties.

So perhaps
 natural=water + water=river
 + stream_pool=yes


Richard

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-03-13 10:13 GMT+01:00 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>:

> If (when, in Australia) the river stops flowing, these pools become a
> water oasis for all.
> And if the pool dries up you can dig there for water, if needed.
>


so where's the distinction to lake? How much is the water flow reduced
there, can you still perceive you're in a river, or is it more like a still
water body with water flowing in and out?

Cheers,
Martin
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Warin]

On 13-Mar-17 07:22 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:


sent from a phone


On 12 Mar 2017, at 16:35, althio  wrote:

Otherwise, if I cannot convince you with that alone, at least expand
to "stream_pool", like:

natural=water
water=lake
lake=stream_pool


I'd rather use water=stream_pool without the lake deviation, but then it still 
is in conflict with water=river. Are these actual features anyway, or are they 
simply the wider parts of the river?



Not only wider but deeper.
They are nice places for a dip.
If (when, in Australia) the river stops flowing, these pools become a water 
oasis for all.
And if the pool dries up you can dig there for water, if needed.


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12 Mar 2017, at 16:35, althio  wrote:
> 
> Otherwise, if I cannot convince you with that alone, at least expand
> to "stream_pool", like:
> 
> natural=water
> water=lake
> lake=stream_pool


I'd rather use water=stream_pool without the lake deviation, but then it still 
is in conflict with water=river. Are these actual features anyway, or are they 
simply the wider parts of the river?

cheers,
Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12 Mar 2017, at 16:35, althio  wrote:
> 
> 
> If you don't need a new tag, I would go for
> natural=water
> water=lake
> (and let the size and position of the feature show that it is a small
> body of water on a river)
> After all, it is a kind of lake, only much smaller ;)



no, it's not a kind of lake similar like 3 trees can never be a kind of forest. 
Both a lake and a forest require a certain size in order to develop the 
ecosystem that characterizes them.

cheers,
Martin 
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[muzirian]

water=pool looks like a good suggestion and better candidate for deafult
water tag too.

Regards,
Kelvin

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 12:35 AM, ael  wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 04:35:54PM +0100, althio wrote:
> > I think just "water=pool" is a bit short and potentially misleading
> > with other types of pools (reflecting pool, swimming pool, salt pool,
> > ...).
> >
>
> In British English, there is no chance of confusion. All the above are
> pools, just with extra information. water=lake is definitely unnatural.
>
> ael
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[ael]

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 04:35:54PM +0100, althio wrote:
> I think just "water=pool" is a bit short and potentially misleading
> with other types of pools (reflecting pool, swimming pool, salt pool,
> ...).
> 

In British English, there is no chance of confusion. All the above are
pools, just with extra information. water=lake is definitely unnatural.

ael


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[althio]

I think just "water=pool" is a bit short and potentially misleading
with other types of pools (reflecting pool, swimming pool, salt pool,
...).

If you don't need a new tag, I would go for
natural=water
water=lake
(and let the size and position of the feature show that it is a small
body of water on a river)
After all, it is a kind of lake, only much smaller ;)
The various definitions to distiguish lake/pond are quite messy, I do
not want to go there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pond#Technical_definitions
Please also note that in current OSM wiki: water=lake "should be
considered default for natural=water, when no water or other
descriptive tags are specified".
I think it is good enough for the kind of semantics we are trying to
achieve in OSM.


Otherwise, if I cannot convince you with that alone, at least expand
to "stream_pool", like:

natural=water
water=lake
lake=stream_pool

or

natural=water
water=stream_pool


-- althio


On 11 March 2017 at 10:24, Andrew Harvey  wrote:
> I'm looking for a tag for "A small and rather deep collection of (usually)
> fresh water, as one supplied by a spring, or occurring in the course of a
> stream;" https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pool#English also like
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_pool.
>
> They come in all shapes and sizes but are usually part of a stream/creek
> where it is deep enough for water to collect there.
>
> Some photo examples:
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/32171903253/in/datetaken-public/
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/32986671125/in/datetaken-public/
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/25031837975/in/datetaken-public/
>
> It's not a lake which is much larger.
>
> I don't think it's right to use water=pond, which is "man-made in most
> cases", and seems to be more commonly used for places in a park where you
> find ducks, often with lots of vegetation.
>
> water=pool seems like the best option. Here is Australia at least a lot of
> them have a name like "... Pool". But since it's undocumented I'm not sure
> what the 226 current uses of the tag are.
>
> What's the process for working out if this is the best choice, and if it
> turns out to be documenting it on the wiki?
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[ael]

On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 01:54:07PM +0100, Thilo Haug wrote:
> 
> in my opinion, this combination is describing it best :
> natural=water
> water=pond

As a native English speaker, these are not ponds. Pools are the natural 
description, as already suggested. So just add natural=water, water=pool
to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:water, and tag accordingly.
The existing tags do not cover these pools.

ael


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] water=pool

[Thilo Haug]

Hi Andrew,

in my opinion, this combination is describing it best :
natural=water
water=pond
in case it's man_made
, it should be
tagged like this.
(the person who wrote "man-made in most cases"
possibly talks about the central park ;-) )

Regarding "the process for working out if this is the best choice",
I also assumed there should be something like a "code of conduct",
but it seems there isn't something unambiguous :

On 09-Mar-17 10:48 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
There are a some references to tagging here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Joto/How_to_invent_tags
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Duck_tagging
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging

Cheers,
Thilo

"All the really stressful times for me have been about process. They
haven't been about code. When code doesn't work, that can actually be
exciting ... Process problems are a pain in the ass. You never, ever
want to have process problems ... That's when people start getting
really angry at each other."
Linus Thorvalds

Am 11.03.2017 um 10:24 schrieb Andrew Harvey:
> I'm looking for a tag for "A small and rather deep collection of
> (usually) fresh water, as one supplied by a spring, or occurring in
> the course of a stream;" https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pool#English
> also like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_pool.
>
> They come in all shapes and sizes but are usually part of a
> stream/creek where it is deep enough for water to collect there.
>
> Some photo examples:
>
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/32171903253/in/datetaken-public/
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/32986671125/in/datetaken-public/
> https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/25031837975/in/datetaken-public/
>
> It's not a lake which is much larger.
>
> I don't think it's right to use water=pond, which is "man-made in most
> cases", and seems to be more commonly used for places in a park where
> you find ducks, often with lots of vegetation.
>
> water=pool seems like the best option. Here is Australia at least a
> lot of them have a name like "... Pool". But since it's undocumented
> I'm not sure what the 226 current uses of the tag are.
>
> What's the process for working out if this is the best choice, and if
> it turns out to be documenting it on the wiki?
>
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 

Thilo Haug
Bismarckstr.37
72764 Reutlingen

Mobil: +49 177 3185856

___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] water=pool

[Andrew Harvey]

I'm looking for a tag for "A small and rather deep collection of (usually)
fresh water, as one supplied by a spring, or occurring in the course of a
stream;" https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pool#English also like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_pool.

They come in all shapes and sizes but are usually part of a stream/creek
where it is deep enough for water to collect there.

Some photo examples:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/32171903253/in/datetaken-public/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/32986671125/in/datetaken-public/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/25031837975/in/datetaken-public/

It's not a lake which is much larger.

I don't think it's right to use water=pond, which is "man-made in most
cases", and seems to be more commonly used for places in a park where you
find ducks, often with lots of vegetation.

water=pool seems like the best option. Here is Australia at least a lot of
them have a name like "... Pool". But since it's undocumented I'm not sure
what the 226 current uses of the tag are.

What's the process for working out if this is the best choice, and if it
turns out to be documenting it on the wiki?
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging