[Tagging] trees and waterways

[Pierre-Alain Dorange]

Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com>
wrote:

please note that english is not my current language.

> I'm wondering what the difference is between the recent discussions
> about trees and waterways. Here's the way things look to me:
> *The wiki says something should be tagged a certain way: ("lone or
> significant tree" for natural=tree | "direction of the way should be
> downstream" for waterway=river, stream, and maybe other values)

I understand and will e explain below how i see the things.

Generally, the wiki explain the concept and the theory. Change and
addition are made with a maximum consensus.
But every mapper can do what he want with the tag, the wiki is not *the
rule* is a general code, a guide.

If we want OSM become a useful tool we need to be able to define some
general guideline and concistency in tag usage. But we also have to let
some freedom to mapper invent new way, new concept, new tag.

> *People don't always see the definition on the wiki, and thus don't
> tag according to it, instead: (using natural=tree for any tree | not
> determining which way a waterway flows and drawing it in that
> direction)

Users with pratice have also (can also) do education.
When a new mapper misued a tag in your area you can talk to him, guide
him and use the wiki as a guideline. But he won't be forced.

> *Many features are now mapped differently from how the wiki says

Some, yes. The wiki and usage are always moving.

> Yet the result is different: with trees, consensus seems to be to
> change the definition, 

I agree this general position. The orginal tree tag was probably an
error, we don't tag particular things with a general tag, because one
day we have to tag general object and the general tag is allready used.
When we invent new tag we must keep this in mind (not easy) for future.

> while with waterways, we seem to be avoiding
> the problem.

... Perhaps have you a proposition. But for my part, it seems "natural"
to use the natural flow of the way has the natural flow of the river.
Perhaps to be more precise can we have new sub-tags : 
* one to precise there is no flow, i have not understand the concept of
a river with no flow but why not ; 
* and another to explicitly give the natural flow (but this new sub tag
has to refer to something and this thign would be the natural drawing
flow (ie. invert) thus why not using the drawing flow directly... Using
one way tag as proposed is an error (for me) because it has a different
meaning (a legal restriction for transport using a way).

The discussion has stop but we need further investication for the
future, but for problem is less important (for me) than the real misused
with tree.

Just me opinion.

-- 
Pierre-Alain Dorange
OSM experiences : <http://www.leretourdelautruche.com/map/>