<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>TBH, I'm all with you (<i>and maybe I'm seen as an eccentric
too...</i>) and I see the tagging of waterways length as
egregiously useless.</p>
<p>Beside, I smell a lack of verifiability [1] in this waterways
property: I'm not a geographer, by far, but in the years I made up
my mind that this is one of those things that experts debate in
their congresses and can be object of accademic thesis.<br>
</p>
<p>On the other hand a tool to compute the total length of waterways
from their source (<i>once you have pinpointed it</i>) to their
mouth (<i>again, once you have pinpointed it</i>), could be really
interesting.</p>
<p>A static value for a river length in OSM, without any information
about its source (<i>pun not intended, but valid anyway...</i>),
is the kind of information I will usually route to /dev/null and
for which I'll seek more autortiative sources (<i>again...</i>) <br>
</p>
<p>Sergio</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>[1] <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability</a><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2019-02-16 22:10, André Pirard
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:89491473-4e0a-5069-f8ae-1495e5294f23@gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
It's easy to make a script to total up all the segments of a
waterway or any way.<br>
...<br>
But I seem like not well understood or maybe seen as eccentric.<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>