[Tagging] When was landuse=reservoir deprecated ?

[Greg Troxel]

Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> writes:

> 2013/6/6 Toby Murray <toby.murray at gmail.com>
>
>> We have gotten several notes reported from craigslist users saying "this
>> lake is missing from the map" but I think it turns out that craigslist is
>> not rendering landuse=reservoir so unless lakes have natural=water they
>> don't show up on the CL maps. Just another rendering oddity I guess.
>
> If you agree that landuse=reservoir doesn't necessarily need to be water on
> the whole area, then it seems logical to require a water-tag on the actual
> water covered area to render "blue". As long as the main style puts so much
> emphasis on landuse people will continue to map areas mainly with landuse
> and use very less frequent the physical tags which are not rendered.

This essentially was the point I was trying to make: when humans see
landuse=reservoir, they think it means different things

  1) parcel containing protection zone and water, arguably to be shaded
  some light green natural/protected.  should have water=reservoir on
  the actual water, to be blue

  2) what is water=reservoir in 1, and thus should be blue

That's why I suggested landuse=reservoir_protection instead, but that
should include the water so it's not right etiher.

I'm fine with landuse=reservoir, but then as always it needs to be clear
and renderers need to catch up.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20130607/285abc1d/attachment.pgp>