On 8 August 2018 at 05:00, Robert Szczepanek <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Before making any changes in wiki I would like to find final agreement on > that topic. > "Flood level" (highest water table) is usually only one of several > informations we can find on "flood mark". Others can be date of flood, > inscription, etc. > Physical object mapped in OSM is rather mark, not just water/flood level. > So "historic=flood_mark" is probably more generic.
Yes, flood_mark would be a better wording than flood_level > >> Yes. >> Complication .. a historic king tide combined with a storm event may be >> considered a historic flood level. >> But 'normal' high tides should be part of the water way tagging system. >> >> > This can be sometimes hard to distinguish. But tide+storm I would consider > rather as flood event - probably higher level comparing to periodic tides. > Quite definitely - a storm surge becomes a flood, not just a very high tide > In such a case we can find in on place two types of marks: > * historic=highwater_mark - with information about periodic highest water > level (no date provided), > * historic=flood_mark - with information about flood event (with date) > So existence of date on such mark could be a good information for proper > tag assignment. I'm not familiar with tides, so please correct me if this > is not the case. High tide is defined as " the highest level which can be predicted to occur under average meteorological conditions and any combination of astronomical conditions" https://www.ausmarinescience.com/marine-science-basics/tides/highest-astronomical-tide/ IMHO, the high tide mark as such shouldn't really be shown in OSM as it should be the line marking either the coastline or riverbank. Thanks Graeme
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
