[Tagging] How to tag small canals?

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Fri Aug 17 23:35:57 UTC 2018

What you are trying to refer to is 'measurement uncertainty'.

For a non professional rough guide;

Naturally formed water way widths may have a great deal of variation 
along their widths .. and so the uncertainty will be very high unless 
specified along short segments.

On 18/08/18 09:11, Peter Elderson wrote:
> It would not be that hard to add a precision to a measurement. Any 
> measurement. Maybe there already is a standard method for that?
> Mvg Peter Elderson
> Op 17 aug. 2018 om 20:50 heeft SelfishSeahorse 
> <selfishseahorse at gmail.com <mailto:selfishseahorse at gmail.com>> het 
> volgende geschreven:
>> On Friday, August 17, 2018, Christoph Hormann <osm at imagico.de 
>> <mailto:osm at imagico.de>> wrote:
>>     On Friday 17 August 2018, SelfishSeahorse wrote:
>>     > Of course we could just use width=*, but it's not always easily
>>     > possible to measure the width (e.g. in a forest) and sometimes it
>>     > changes often.
>>     I would translate this into "i want a subjective non-verifiable
>>     classification system but i hide this by defining pro forma
>>     verifiable
>>     criteria for the classes".
>> A classification based on width is arbitrary, but i don't see why it 
>> be subjective.
>>     If you want to map the river width tag width=*, if you don't want
>>     to map
>>     the width then don't create classes based on width thresholds.
>> Imagine a stream/brook in a forest, not visible on satellite imagery. 
>> You can't measure its width on site (because you don't have the 
>> equipment or because the soil at its sides is marshy), but you know 
>> (estimate) that it's wider than 1 metre, but less wide than 3 metres. 
>> In my opinion it's better to have that information that none.
>> If you enter width="1 m - 3 m", data users very likely won't 
>> understand it. However if you enter width="2 m", the width value 
>> pretends to be exact. Besides it is very unlikely that someone else 
>> verifies that value, considering the fact that less than 1% of 
>> waterway=* tags have a width=* tag.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180818/d79701da/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list