[Tagging] Waterway equivalent of noexit=yes?
aamackie at gmail.com
Sat Jul 18 18:41:13 UTC 2020
On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 at 19:09, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 at 18:53, Tod Fitch <tod at fitchfamily.org> wrote:
>> What I’d like is one or two tags to indicate that all visible indications
>> of a water way ends at this point and that the QA tools should not flag
>> them as errors to be fixed.
> One of the things we need is an anti-spring. Marked on Ordnance Survey
> as a sink. We have natural=sinkhole but that seems only to apply to a
> hole and/or depression.
The closest I can find on the wiki is manhole=drain? sinkhole=ponor seems
to be for natural-looking versions.
For the delta like regions if these tend to just peter out, some sort of
intermittent water area may be better. Like for an infiltration basin, but
natural. Then again, maybe Osmose shouldn't complain about the abrupt end
of an intermittent waterway unless another one starts nearby?
> I can see that the underground storm drain system may need a different
>> indication as the waterway does continue, it is just not visible where.
> It's a culvert, if you know its route. Otherwise it's anybody's guess
> where it goes
> and what happens to it.
There are wiki pages for tunnel=flooded (doesn't ring true for a sewer) and
man_made=pipeline + location = underground (also seems inappropriate).
There is also an old proposal for water networks here:
I'd be tempted to just put culvert tagging on the node and add a barrier
tag for any gratings. I'm sure that will also annoy the validators, but it
should at least indicate to other mappers that it goes somewhere.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging