Re: [Tagging] New proposal: water=*
Hi Nathan, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_art http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7j8Kpp3vYU it might be helpfull, to map spots like that ;) --- Yes, it might be better to use separate tags. intermittent=yes (but I don´t like these yes-values, like: its a chair:yes etc. ) It looks better with a kind of type=*, dynamic=intermittent (permanent, tide, ), ... ? And you can add too the intermittent-times like =mai to october ... On the other hand, an old discussion: I prefere to use the natural-key for some kind of wilderness-near-stuff and reflecting_pool or reservoir doesn´t belong into that for sure. And we already have waterway for floating- or running fresh water. May be supplement this with a waterpoint or waterpond or something ...? And the term way - its a street-concept. That constricts the view to the object ... On the theme of water, in a land-planning view, you can make the differences between marin, brackish and fresh water and tide affected or not and than (on the surface) running waters standing waters and supplemented: tidal waters cheers, crom btw: how I can post here in a right way? How to make indentions? Where is a faq for http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New proposal: water=*
Hi! Since there were no comments for the last week, I've initiated a voting on the water=* proposal. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Water_details IZ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New proposal: water=*
Hi Ilya, very nice! About the keys: funny is reflecting pool: instead reflecting pool I would suggest something like land_art, because water is used primary as an architectural- or design feature and - the reflection is not always and for everyone obvious? And what I´m still missing is a dashed or dotted line for temporarily creeks in mediteran areas - there is water in the ground (not for the larger wadies, I think those key already exists). And oxbow is important. cheers, crom http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2011-April/007368.html ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New proposal: water=*
On 4/16/2011 3:53 PM, crom wrote: Hi Ilya, very nice! About the keys: funny is reflecting pool: instead reflecting pool I would suggest something like land_art, because water is used primary as an architectural- or design feature and - the reflection is not always and for everyone obvious? As a (US) English speaker I have no idea what land art is, but know reflecting pool. And what I´m still missing is a dashed or dotted line for temporarily creeks in mediteran areas - there is water in the ground (not for the larger wadies, I think those key already exists). http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:intermittent This makes sense as a separate tag, not part of water=*, since a drainage pond can be intermittent. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New proposal: water=*
On 01/04/2011 16:04, Ilya Zverev wrote: It seems like I've messed up wording or just stated the purpose not clearly enough, since you are not the first to ask this question. Of course I'm aware of river mapping scheme. I do not propose to alter waterway=river/stream/anything. The main point of this proposal is to mark what natural=water on an area means. Is this area a lake, a pond? We have no means to determine that now. But also in this proposal I point out that waterway=riverbank does not differ much from natural=water, and suggest to map it with natural=water + water=river. This means you have multiple keys for river (water waterway). It also means your using river to describe two different items (river riverbank) This leads to pointless confusion. Also, for landuse=reservoir I propose using natural=water + water=reservoir, because it makes reseirvoirs mapping consistent with other water bodies. +1 Cheers Dave F. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New proposal: water=*
Dave. F wrote: But also in this proposal I point out that waterway=riverbank does not differ much from natural=water, and suggest to map it with natural=water + water=river. This means you have multiple keys for river (water waterway). It also means your using river to describe two different items (river riverbank) Yes, but the difference is less when you actually map and not dig into words. 1) Doesn't anyone think that areas tagged with waterway=riverbank are neither waterways nor riverbanks? 2) And that water bodies of rivers have more similarities with natural=water (lakes, for example), than with waterway=river or any other object tagged with waterway=*? They are even drawn on the majority of maps (including osm.org mapnik) exactly like natural=water. 3) So, it would be more logical to tag river body as natural=water. 4) And according to this proposal, to specify the water body type with water=*. 5) And the most suitable tag value for that would be water=river (not riverbank, that's for sure). I'm open to other suggestions. This leads to pointless confusion. I agree, but it seems there is always confusion when tagging is changed (see public transport proposal, for example). IZ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New proposal: water=*
On 01/04/2011 05:30, Ilya Zverev wrote: Hi. At some point we've been fed up with fixing name=Pond and such, so I guess it's time to be more specific about what natural=water is. I suggest a new detail tag, water=*. It's pretty straightforward, but there are some deprecations (which at this point can't deprecate anything because there are a lot of water bodies on the map), so it could use a discussion. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Water_details Aren't most of these in use already? water=river A body of river, which is currently mapped as waterway=riverbank. You seem to be unaware of waterway=river. Please refer to his for a complete tagging guide: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Driverbank I realize this is a proposal page but as a general note on wiki creation, I believe there should be no examples of XML code. The wiki is predominately used by newbies looking for clear simple explanations. XML is 'behind the scenes' and not relevant to end users. Anything that looks like programming code (I'm aware it isn't) just scares many potential users away with the feeling it's too complicated. Cheers Dave F. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New proposal: water=*
Dave F. wrote: Aren't most of these in use already? water=river A body of river, which is currently mapped as waterway=riverbank. You seem to be unaware of waterway=river. Please refer to his for a complete tagging guide: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Driverbank It seems like I've messed up wording or just stated the purpose not clearly enough, since you are not the first to ask this question. Of course I'm aware of river mapping scheme. I do not propose to alter waterway=river/stream/anything. The main point of this proposal is to mark what natural=water on an area means. Is this area a lake, a pond? We have no means to determine that now. But also in this proposal I point out that waterway=riverbank does not differ much from natural=water, and suggest to map it with natural=water + water=river. Also, for landuse=reservoir I propose using natural=water + water=reservoir, because it makes reseirvoirs mapping consistent with other water bodies. I've added natural=water to all possible value examples, to make the proposal clearer. I realize this is a proposal page but as a general note on wiki creation, I believe there should be no examples of XML code. I used wrong proposal pages as example, as it seems. The example is remade now. IZ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New proposal: water=*
On 4/1/2011 11:35 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: (not sure if fountain applies to the kind of big flat water areas you can typically find in front of castles which are positioned there to reflect the castle?) Those are called reflecting pools. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New proposal: water=*
On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:35:37 +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: what natural=water on an area means. Is this area a lake, a pond? We have no means to determine that now. could you expand what a pond is? I get several translations for this, ranging from natural to artificial bodies of water. I stick to wikipedia's definition: a body of standing water, either natural or man-made, that is usually smaller than a lake. If it has Pond in the name — it is a pond. Probably it's what you call a fountain (?). How do you suggest would a large fountain (not sure if fountain applies to the kind of big flat water areas you can typically find in front of castles which are positioned there to reflect the castle?) be tagged? (wiki.osm.org) ...most fountains should be tagged as nodes amenity=fountain representing the location of the fountain sitting within an area of natural=water (plus water=pond on the area, since fountains are usually found in [man-made] bodies of standing water). IZ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New proposal: water=*
2011/4/1 Ilya Zverev zve...@textual.ru On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:35:37 +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: what natural=water on an area means. Is this area a lake, a pond? We have no means to determine that now. could you expand what a pond is? I get several translations for this, ranging from natural to artificial bodies of water. I stick to wikipedia's definition: a body of standing water, either natural or man-made, that is usually smaller than a lake. If it has Pond in the name — it is a pond. Probably it's what you call a fountain (?). no, a fountain is an artificial structure. There are IMHO no natural fountains. So looking at wikipedia also for lake I found that basically the main difference between the two is the size but also, how deep it is. If it were only the size this tag would not be needed, because unless you draw lakes as single nodes the size is already immanent in the db. How do you suggest would a large fountain (not sure if fountain applies to the kind of big flat water areas you can typically find in front of castles which are positioned there to reflect the castle?) be tagged? (wiki.osm.org) ...most fountains should be tagged as nodes amenity=fountain representing the location of the fountain sitting within an area of natural=water (plus water=pond on the area, since fountains are usually found in [man-made] bodies of standing water). yes, but a fountain is a piece of architecture, which either pours water or jets it into the air (wikipedia). For the case in question I'd prefer water=reflecting_pool like suggested by Nathan Edgars II. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] New proposal: water=*
On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 17:55:06 +0200, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: So looking at wikipedia also for lake I found that basically the main difference between the two is the size but also, how deep it is. If it were only the size this tag would not be needed, because unless you draw lakes as single nodes the size is already immanent in the db. Yes, and also the difference sometimes is in the name, as for Walden Pond, mentioned in wikipedia. big flat water areas you can typically find in front of castles which are positioned there to reflect the castle For the case in question I'd prefer water=reflecting_pool like suggested by Nathan Edgars II. Nice find, we don't have such name in Russia — they are called ponds here. I've added water=reflecting_pool in the proposal. IZ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] New proposal: water=*
Hi. At some point we've been fed up with fixing name=Pond and such, so I guess it's time to be more specific about what natural=water is. I suggest a new detail tag, water=*. It's pretty straightforward, but there are some deprecations (which at this point can't deprecate anything because there are a lot of water bodies on the map), so it could use a discussion. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Water_details IZ ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
