[Tagging] Features underwater (inside reservoirs)

Cornelis cornelis.H at web.de
Mon Jun 8 09:31:20 UTC 2020


This thread is a great help to me, as I recently discovered this bridge
and wondered if it can be tagged in a more appropriate way:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/51.18387/8.95239

Currently it is tagged like that (shortened):
historic=bridge
intermittent=yes
layer=-1
man_made=bridge
name=Aseler Brücke
seasonal=yes
tourism=attraction

With these tags and the surrounding footways the bridge is treatey as
normal (foot)way by OSRM and graphhopper, altough it only falls dry
roughly every other autumn. Is this a tagging issue that may be resolved
with correct/additional tags? After reading the discussion I think at
least three tags should be added:

building=bridge
abandoned=yes
location=underwater

Then some questions on other tags currently in use:
• historic=bridge seems ok to me, but I'm not sure if it is a conflict
with building=bridge. Do I have to choose either one?
• intermittent seems to only be in use with water bodies, as far as i
can tell after reading the wiki article.
• seasonal is somewhat related with intermittent but in use for other
things as well. Should I remove these two, nonetheless?

Regards
Cornelis

Am 06.06.20 um 12:47 schrieb Paul Allen:
> On Sat, 6 Jun 2020 at 10:22, Lanxana . <lanxanae at gmail.com
> <mailto:lanxanae at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     We have been looking for how to tag the ruins of constructions
>     (buildings, bridges or roads) that are inside some reservoirs.
>     Although they generally remain underwater, but in times of
>     drought, when the reservoir level drops low enough, they can be
>     visited on foot.  Like this [1]
>
>     On first time, the combination historic=ruins + building=yes (or
>     whatever corresponds) identifies that it’s a historical feature,
>
> The wiki page on historic features says that historic=* is to identify
> features
> of historic interest.  See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Historic
> The key historic=* is not a synonym for old=*. Admittedly, the page also
> says it is somewhat subjective as to what is of historic interest, but
> it gives
> several criteria which I do not think are satisfied here.
>
> Nor is historic=ruins really appropriate.  Some of the buildings may
> be intact.
> And they're not really of historic interest.  The ruins of St Dogmaels
> Abbey
> qualify as historic=ruins.  See
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:St_Dogmaels_Abbey_-_geograph.org.uk_-_309701.jpg
>
> A better way of handling non-historic ruins, is to use ruins=yes or
> namespace the key, such as ruins:building=house.  There has been
> much debate on this list as to which of those two is correct and if one is
> preferred over the other in certain circumstances.  All I'll point out
> is that with some renderers ruins:building=house does not render
> but with ruins=yes it does.
>
> If the building is not in ruins but has been abandoned (by virtue of being
> underwater most of the time, then abandoned:building=house or
> abandoned=yes.
>
>     it’s in ruins and/or it isn’t habitable. But how to indicate that
>     it’s underwater partially or totally and its access is
>     occasionally possible, when the water drops?
>
> location=underwater accounts for normal state.  You could possibly use a
> conditional to indicate occasional visibility but it's probably not
> worth it.  Especially
> as most of the rare times it's uncovered it will only be partially
> uncovered to a
> greater or lesser extent.  A note or description on the body of water
> is probably
> the way to handle it: "During times of low water some buildings may be
> visible."
>
>     I find these tags, but none convinces me:
>
>     Historic=wreck [2] -> only for nautical elements
>
> Specifically for vessels.  "Wreck" as in "shipwreck."
>
>     Location=underwater [3] -> it seems that it’s appropriate but the
>     description tells “installed between a water surface and the floor
>     beneath”, it isn’t the case…
>
> But see also https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:location which
> does not
> say "installed."  I suspect that "installed" was used in the page you
> found
> because it was written by somebody who does not have English as a first
> language or was written by somebody who was only thinking of man-made
> POIs.  Or maybe it was written by somebody who didn't like using the
> word "located" because it seemed a little repetitious so went with
> "installed."
>
> So building=whatever + ruins=yes + location=underwater or
> ruins:building=whatever + location=underwater.
>
> --
> Paul
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200608/c61dcfc8/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list