[Tagging] Flood mark or high water mark

Andrew Davidson theswavu at gmail.com
Thu Jul 26 10:29:33 UTC 2018


On 25/07/18 22:05, Robert Szczepanek wrote:
> 
> Question 1:
> a/ flood_mark
> b/ high_water_mark
> c/ highwater_mark	

A.

High water mark is the level that the water got to, so if you marked 
that it would be a high water mark marker....


> Question 2:
> Which tagging convention should we follow:
> a/ flood_mark=yes + historic=memorial + memorial:type=flood_mark
> b/ historic=flood_mark + flood_mark:type=(plaque, painted, ...)
> c/ historic=highwater_mark

Have you thought about using something like man_made=flood_mark? Similar 
to man_made=survey_point 
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dsurvey_point).

Historic suggests that the flood mark is interesting because it is old. 
Some flood marks are certainly old and interesting:

http://floodlist.com/dealing-with-floods/flood-high-water-marks#jp-carousel-5861
http://floodlist.com/dealing-with-floods/flood-high-water-marks#jp-carousel-5857

Others are quite new:

http://floodlist.com/dealing-with-floods/flood-high-water-marks#jp-carousel-5865
http://floodlist.com/dealing-with-floods/flood-high-water-marks#jp-carousel-6289

Does it have to be flood_mark:type=*? Would flood_mark=* be adequate?



More information about the Tagging mailing list