Another argument against use of hazard=* for rapids is that the hazard key has been used almost always with highway=* features, not waterways.
Also, currently waterfalls (which can be considered very large and steep rapids!) are tagged waterway=waterfall on a node. Other waterway barriers are also tagged this way, e.g. waterway=dam and waterway=weir. Tagging waterway=rapids on a node allows rapids to be tagged like other waterway barriers to travel and similar to waterfalls. -- Joseph Eisenberg On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 2:36 AM Tomas Straupis <tomasstrau...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2020-12-17, kt, 00:02 ael via Tagging rašė: > > This is slightly off-topic in that I am picking up on the > > hazard tag rather than rapids. I see no objection to adding hazard=rapids > > although that might be redundant unless there exist rapids that are > > not hazardous. I suppose shallow rapids might qualify. > > Note that rapid does not necessarily have to be interpreted as > hazard. If prominent on the ground it can be one of orienting points > (with bridges, settlements, intakes etc.) - to cover distance > covered/remaining. We have a lot of "small rapids" which can be easily > passed with no risk even with babies and they're still marked for > orienting purposes. > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
