It's the standard to draw a waterway in the direction of flow. I've
questioned this several times, but it's an ingrained default.
My question is more specific: what happens to a drainage canal that
reverses direction? I offer the Everglades and surrounding
agricultural land as an example. There are huge "water conservation
areas" that store water. When it rains, gates are closed and opened
to direct water into these. During a drought, gates send water back
out into the canals for local use. When there's a big storm, water
will instead go directly out to sea.
So there are a lot of major canals that have no fixed direction. How
should these be mapped? Is there any existing scheme that can show
how water flows under different conditions?
Calling all real technical-consulting planet-oriented hydrologists:
join in this conversation, please! (You never know).
NE2, you might invent, then propose a "newer, meant to be better
because we discussed it first" standard after asking that question
the way you did. One way you seem to do so (NE2, though others, too)
is with tags containing colons, as that has emerged in much
structured tagging in a somewhat orderly way. Without deriving a
dialect of it off the top of my head, that might even be a specific
instance of what is known as a regular language. (We use
network=US:I for Interstates, for example).
Inventing a stub language like tidal=yes and barrier=marine_gate and
semantics for the actual direction of the way that represents
something ABOUT its flow (like seasonal or active or whatever) is
real work that can be sketched on a whiteboard as an idea development
methodology. It's more difficult via a channel like this digested
list, but difficulties can be overcome. But after some fits and
starts and people double-checking and looking over each other's
shoulders and finding things that work...we have something.
Considering how sane, smart growth of tags and processes whereby
these evolve with real intent seems a fundamental topic. Positing
something like the quick stub of brain-spew above shows how some of
us are good at posing questions, some of us are good at longer-term
vision or middle-building, many of us are great at mapping, and all
of us can recognize these differences are strengths when our numbers
speak together. (Even when it is seen that there is some spew that
happens, it is the process of getting better of which I type).
There really is a "middle" of OSM which feels quite under-built to
me, at least from the perspective of California. Maybe that is just
me having an early-feeling, though confident and articulate voice, or
lack of finding specific more-local OSM community. I have
collaborated over networked wires for many decades in many ways.
This newer "middle of OSM" overlaps in my mind with "conversation
places" where listening and structured whiteboard-like collaboration
takes place. Let's build OSM's better middle with this in mind. I
look for these conversation places myself, so I reach out a bit.
I do not say how (right now), it's complex, everybody seems to have
ideas and want to be listening and sorting that out is hard work and
would take too long (right here). But "listening areas" and "working
groups" and such are the neighborhood of what I mean. Am I
unplugged-in from these? Or does "our national scene" (OSM in the
US) largely get hashed out right here in talk-us? We seem to be
lacking in coordination: there are terrific skill-sets here, and
much gets done, but new focus for those laser-bolts of "good methods
we figured out work really well for us" that can synergy and
feedback-loop and leap us ahead, well, as they say, could "use
improvement."
I do put myself out here, and yes, it feels a little bold to say
this. I listen, I look for structured listening.
I look for better coordination and yes, maybe even towards
leadership. Leadership doesn't have to be vested in an individual,
it can consist of a core of "ideas that work, only" as a beginning.
Yes, this is hard work.
SteveA
California
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
