[talk-au] How to tag reaches (segments of a waterway)?

{withheld} Pheasant.Coucal at gmail.com
Sun Apr 10 04:23:57 BST 2011


On 10/04/11 12:23, 4x4falcon wrote:
> On 09/04/11 16:28, John Smith wrote:
>> On 9 April 2011 18:22, Andrew Harvey<andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>> I would like to map some named reaches ("straight portion of a stream
>>> or river, as from one turn to another;") part of a major river.
>>
>> To do this I would shift the river specific information to a relation,
>> which is useful in any case since you can then lump all parts of the
>> river into the same relation and then the individual segments can be
>> tagged differently.
>>
> 
> Agree and include the river banks as part of the relation.
> 
> Leave all the admin boundary out of it and remove any waterway tags from
> the admin boundary.
> 
> You should not need the river way down the middle if the river banks
> have been mapped.
> 

Bearing in mind "reach" is also the nautical term for a tack, is it
worth considering Andrew's source map might be documenting the lines of
sailing between navigation markers (or indeed landmarks) which are no
longer even well-known? [Disclaimer: I-am-not-a-sailor.] They may not
even document current-day navigation channels, if that part of the river
required dredging to keep such open in the past.

In other words I am wondering whether it might be best to add the new
names completely independently of both the waterway and the
administrative boundary. Maybe create a tag like "waterway:navigation",
perhaps for the new feature, perhaps?

Justification for independence: these things are straight segments which
rationalise a natural (i.e. curved) waterway for boating purposes...
therefore are not the waterway itself. Similar argument for them not
being the administrative layer (although they might be - can this be
checked in any way?)

My 2c.



More information about the Talk-au mailing list