[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Reservoirs, lakes, and ponds

Volker Schmidt voschix at gmail.com
Sun Dec 20 15:26:54 UTC 2020


383 813
*landuse* <https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/landuse>
*reservoir* <https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/landuse=reservoir>
334 450
*water* <https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/water>
*reservoir* <https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/water=reservoir>
I think it does make no sense to deprecate a tag with 380k uses.
The two will stay with us in parallel for the entire lifetime off the OSM
database
As you rightly state that no automatic conversion should be used, any
atempt of manual editing is a waste of time.
In addition, please consider that deprecated features are being flagged by
editor sw on saving any changeet that contains an deprecated tag, even if
it has nothing to do with your actual editing, this would be adding another
contnued nuisance for mappers (there are already others opf that type).

Please don't do it

Volker

On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 15:58, Brian M. Sperlongano <zelonewolf at gmail.com>
wrote:

> A proposal[1] to clarify the tagging of reservoirs, lakes, and ponds is
> now open for comments.
>
> This proposal:
>
>   1. Deprecates landuse=reservoir
>   2. Provides definitions for:
>      a. water=reservoir
>      b. water=lake
>      c. water=pond
>
> It is clear from various multiple discussions on this topic that there are
> still open questions from the original 2011 water=* proposal, as well as
> the exact definition of a reservoir, and how they differ from lakes and
> ponds.  Previous discussions indicated that there is community support for
> maintaining a distinction between lake and pond, rather than eliminating or
> merging these concepts.
>
> The definitions posed in this proposal were developed with the help of
> considerable community input over the last week, and I want to thank the
> numerous folks that collaborated on this.  The real world presents many
> edge cases that make it challenging to come up with clear definitions, but
> that should not prevent us from trying.
>
> The goal in these definitions is to *describe* rather than *prescribe* how
> reservoir, lake, and pond are actually tagged.  This necessarily involves
> some degree of subjectivity between the categories, and the proposed
> definitions leave it to mappers to make these subjective decisions when a
> body of water exhibits some characteristics of more than one of these terms.
>
> As this topic has been discussed ad nauseam for nearly a decade, I hope
> that this proposal, discussion, and subsequent vote will allow us to put
> this issue to rest, and/or document the level of community support that
> exists for different tagging schemes.
>
> [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Reservoir
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20201220/3a69a196/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list