[Tagging] Rapids (whitewater) on rivers

[Joseph Eisenberg]

Another argument against use of hazard=* for rapids is that the hazard key
has been used almost always with highway=* features, not waterways.

Also, currently waterfalls (which can be considered very large and steep
rapids!) are tagged waterway=waterfall on a node. Other waterway barriers
are also tagged this way, e.g. waterway=dam and waterway=weir. Tagging
waterway=rapids on a node allows rapids to be tagged like other waterway
barriers to travel and similar to waterfalls.

-- Joseph Eisenberg

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 2:36 AM Tomas Straupis <tomasstraupis at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 2020-12-17, kt, 00:02 ael via Tagging rašė:
> > This is slightly off-topic in that I am picking up on the
> > hazard tag rather than rapids. I see no objection to adding hazard=rapids
> > although that might be redundant unless there exist rapids that are
> > not hazardous. I suppose shallow rapids might qualify.
>
>   Note that rapid does not necessarily have to be interpreted as
> hazard. If prominent on the ground it can be one of orienting points
> (with bridges, settlements, intakes etc.) - to cover distance
> covered/remaining. We have a lot of "small rapids" which can be easily
> passed with no risk even with babies and they're still marked for
> orienting purposes.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20201217/1df4e3a6/attachment.htm>