daveswarthout at gmail.com
Wed Mar 22 07:53:40 UTC 2017
You might use waterway as the main tag to prevent confusion with the
top-level tag of water=*
Either waterway=pool (TagInfo: 26 uses), or waterway=stream_pool, would be
better than water=stream_pool. I still think it better to avoid using the
word stream in the value because then a pool on a river would have these
two tags, which might look strange to some people:
This tagging seems more "logical" IMO:
The existing waterway=pool objects seem to be either small ponds where one
can bathe or some sort of natural=basin.
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:32 PM, John Willis <johnw at mac.com> wrote:
> On Mar 13, 2017, at 5:22 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
> I'd rather use water=stream_pool without the lake deviation, but then it
> still is in conflict with water=river. Are these actual features anyway, or
> are they simply the wider parts of the river?
> +1 for stream_pool.
> The features they are talking about are usually where a normally shallow
> stream feeds into topography (man made or natural) that creates a much
> deeper/wide/slower moving section of the tiny stream than “normal",
> allowing someone to reasonably submerge their body, or jump into. this is
> an “attraction” of the stream, usually used by people hiking or playing in
> the water. Some of them may be locally famous.
> I would put these under leisure. they are only useful for some kind of
> leisure activity.
> If I was interested in tagging the features of a certain spot for campers
> or backpackers to set up a tent, (like micromapping a part of a park), then
> mapping these might be useful, as you might choose one location over
> another based on having this pool available.
> having water=pool sounds like a recipe for incorrectly tagged swimming
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging