[Tagging] "Feature Proposal - RFC - Qanat"

Walker Bradley walker.t.bradley at gmail.com
Fri Jun 26 17:19:51 UTC 2020


I fully support it as outlined by Joseph.

> On Jun 26, 2020, at 12:59, Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> > Regarding man_made=qanat versus canal=qanat, it is worth pointing out that qanats surface and become surface canals for irrigation and distribution.  > Thus, it would be continuity to go from waterway=canal, canal=qanat, tunnel=yes to waterway=canal instead.
> 
> Yes, that is the plan. You can also add usage=irrigation or another appropriate value of usage=*, and width=*
> 
> – Joseph Eisenberg
> 
>> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 9:12 AM Walker Bradley <walker.t.bradley at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I concur that historic or heritage should be secondary tags.
>> 
>> Regarding man_made=qanat versus canal=qanat, it is worth pointing out that qanats surface and become surface canals for irrigation and distribution.  Thus, it would be continuity to go from waterway=canal, canal=qanat, tunnel=yes to waterway=canal instead.  Thoughts?
>> 
>>>> On Jun 26, 2020, at 11:27, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 at 15:57, Walker Bradley <walker.t.bradley at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> So it would seem that historic=* or heritage=* would be appropriate sub-tags for qanats when applicable on top of waterway=canal, canal=qanat, tunnel=yes.
>>> 
>>> That's how I see it.  Using historic=qanat for modern qanats seems wrong.  So
>>> if we need different tagging for modern qanats anyway, then handle historic
>>> qanats by adding historic=yes.
>>>> 
>>>> I guess we would need to discuss after the approval of Qanat for what criterion/ia would determine historic=yes for qanat.
>>> 
>>> See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Historic and then discuss if it needs
>>> modifying/expanding to specifically deal with qanats or if the page for
>>> man_made=qanat needs text clarifying what Historic means for qanats.
>>> 
>>> If a historian, even an amateur one, is eager to visit it then it's historic.
>>> If a historian takes a look and says "Meh" then it isn't historic.  Which
>>> isn't a very objective metric, so some would say the historic tag
>>> shouldn't be used at all (another good reason to prefer man_made=qanat)
>>> over historic=qanat).
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Paul
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Tagging mailing list
>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200626/c6976c70/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list