[Tagging] Proposed features - RFC 2 - Pressurized waterways

François Lacombe fl.infosreseaux at gmail.com
Wed Feb 21 14:05:53 UTC 2018

Hi Janko,

2018-02-20 17:00 GMT+01:00 Janko Mihelić <janjko at gmail.com>:

> We need a value for man made waterways that aren't used for carrying water
> away, but for bringing water somewhere.
This sounds to be the waterway=canal definition.
Navigation, irrigation, spillway, hydropower are usage and may go in
usage=* key.

Look at this table :
Canal can go open air, in culvert and free flow tunnel

> Waterway=aqueduct looks ok to me, although, in the Wikipedia page for
> aqueduct, bringing water to hydro power stations is never mentioned. But I
> think it's ok to use that value for that use.

In the same time, systems like "Los Angeles Aqueduct" are called aqueduct
and are composed of canals, tunnels and pipelines.

That's why I like the definition of Aqueduct like a system and not like a
precise building.

Am I wrong ?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180221/dbf461df/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list