[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - sluice_gate
penorman at mac.com
Mon Jan 17 06:08:01 GMT 2011
Based on feedback, I've modified
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tagging-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:tagging-
> bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Paul Norman
> Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2011 7:36 PM
> To: 'Tag discussion, strategy and related tools'
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - sluice_gate
> > From: Steve Bennett
> > On 5/01/2011 3:18 PM, John Smith wrote:
> > > Perhaps a more generic approach would work, eg waterway=flow_control
> > > flow_control=weir|sluice_gate|flood_gate|spillway_gate|....
> > Yeah something like that would be reasonable. What I'd like to see a
> > lot more of is planning ahead: coming up with a scheme into which all
> > future subtags can be slotted. It's very hard to change a tag once
> > it's become popular. So perhaps:
> > waterway=dam (a wall with water on one side) waterway=weir (a wall
> > with water flowing over the top) waterway=flow_control (an opening
> > through which water sometimes flows).
> > flow_control=sluice_gate|flood_gate|spillway_gate|lock_gate...
> > Then we get people who know this stuff to try and find exceptions that
> > don't fit into the above scheme, and redesign it.
> I've been looking into this. How does this sound?
> waterway=dam and waterway=weir remain unchanged.
> waterway=flow_control - a device for controlling the flow of water
> sluice_gate: a sluice gate.
> discharge: A discharge point like
> The question is, what else would go there? Flood gates don't belong
> there - that's the *usage* of the gate, not the *type* of gate.
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Tagging