[Tagging] Is waterway=riverbank an 'Old scheme' ?

Graeme Fitzpatrick graemefitz1 at gmail.com
Fri Sep 7 22:55:12 UTC 2018


On Sat, 8 Sep 2018 at 05:40, Richard <ricoz.osm at gmail.com> wrote:

> everything can be handled with waterway=riverbanks at least as well.
>

Question regarding riverbanks & where they should be marked, thanks?

Was doing some HOT mapping a little while back in Nepal & the area I was
working on was surrounding a river - sorry, I can't remember the exact
location?

The imagery I was working of had apparently been taken during the dry
season as the actual river channel with water in it was ~30 - 50 m's wide.
But the wet season river (or possibly flood?) channel was very obviously
~500 - 700 m's wide.

What should we be marking as the "riverbank" - where the water is visible
"now", or the defined limits of where it spreads out to in the wet season?

Thanks

Graeme
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180908/e2a2613b/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list