[Tagging] The saga of landuse=reservoir vs water=reservoir

[Brian M. Sperlongano]

Tomas,

Respectfully, I ask you to cease the pattern of name-calling, personal
attacks, and insulting language used in this forum, and on project bug
trackers[1][2].

Let's please assume good faith and be respectful while we discuss
differences of opinion with an open mind - we are all here for the same
reason - working together to create the best possible map for the world.


[1] https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/17874
[2] https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/6589

On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 10:39 AM Tomas Straupis <tomasstraupis at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 2020-12-13, sk, 16:13 Brian M. Sperlongano rašė:
> > 2019 was a turning point, and over the last two years, landuse=reservoir
> has
> > been on a steady decline, while water=reservoir continued its rapid
> growth.
>
>   New/duplicate schema with water=reservoir only launched because iD
> coders decided to skip standard IT processes of product development
> (or were not familiar with the basics of IT) and simply went for what
> they personally liked, not what was better, and introduced
> water=reservoir as the only way to tag, all this at the time when
> water=reservoir usage was close to zero!
>
>   And the only reason for change of stat starting 2019 is because
> coders of iD decided to lie to the users that landuse=reservoir is
> deprecated which it never was and started replacing landuse=reservoir
> under their highly controversial disguise of "upgrade tags".
>
>   So the change of statistics is not the preference of mappers but
> preference of some nerds.
>
> > Is it time to more directly recommend that mappers favor natural=water +
> water=reservoir
> > *instead of* rather than *in addition to* landuse=reservoir?
>
>   I would propose to deprecate water=reservoir and even more - add
> guards so that such pointless/nerdy duplicate standards would not be
> introduced in the future.
>
>   Note that one of the main nerdy points of this schema was to have a
> possibility to write sql easier (somebody has problems with "and/or")
> and this would also require riverbanks to fall into this new water
> schema. And riverbank clearly does not fall into that even with iD
> lying about it too. Therefore the only point has failed and this
> stupidity is spreading havoc in tagging of such prominent water
> features for more than 10 years now.
>
> P.S. There is quite an easy solution to have a separate iD instance
> for beginners with correct tagging presets loaded.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20201213/119276a1/attachment-0001.htm>