On Sun, Aug 06, 2017 at 11:33:55PM +0200, Daniel Koć wrote: > W dniu 06.08.2017 o 23:19, Richard pisze: > > >The width is fine for many small rivers where mapping riverbanks would be > >a nonsense and should be respected by the renderer. > >But what you ask for seems like tagging for the renderer. Most of the > >information is already there, either river width or the geometry determined > >by riverbanks. > > Using classification is not tagging for the renderer, because it's not > cheating that it's something different - it's just simplifying and sorting. > > It's a useful generalization, just like having different types of roads as a > general property. Highways of course have width too and you can also draw > the geometry with area:highway=*, but that's a different thing. On the macro > scale you don't want all the details, only general data.
the difference though is that in many countries every road has a roadsign identifying it as some kind of primary - secondary road type, also having legal implications someplaces. That doesn't seem common for rivers and I am wondering if this information will be ever useful to anyone.. probably not even your renderer as it would take years before a notable part of rivers are tagged. Some rivers have waterway relations which could be used to make some classification? Richard _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
