[Tagging] New proposal: water=*

Ilya Zverev zverik at textual.ru
Mon Apr 4 13:57:38 BST 2011

Dave. F wrote:
>> But also in this proposal I point out that waterway=riverbank does not
>> differ much from natural=water, and suggest to map it with natural=water
>> water=river.

>This means you have multiple keys for river (water & waterway).
>It also means your using river to describe two different items (river & 

Yes, but the difference is less when you actually map and not dig into

1) Doesn't anyone think that areas tagged with waterway=riverbank are
neither waterways nor riverbanks?
2) And that water bodies of rivers have more similarities with
natural=water (lakes, for example), than with waterway=river or any other
object tagged with waterway=*? They are even drawn on the majority of maps
(including osm.org mapnik) exactly like natural=water.
3) So, it would be more logical to tag river body as natural=water.
4) And according to this proposal, to specify the water body type with
5) And the most suitable tag value for that would be water=river (not
riverbank, that's for sure). I'm open to other suggestions.

>This leads to pointless confusion.

I agree, but it seems there is always confusion when tagging is changed
(see public transport proposal, for example).


More information about the Tagging mailing list