[talk-au] LPI Base Map - green areas ?

[Nev Wedding]

On 17 Jan 2016, at 11:28 AM, Andrew Davidson <u887 at internode.on.net> wrote:
> 
> On 16/01/16 11:47, Nev Wedding wrote:
>> Though I don’t know the area you refer to, I feel landuse=water_catchment is an excellent choice and is the correct tag for an area that has a capture of water as specific defined use as already stated on https://www.wyong.nsw.gov.au/getmedia/7ca695e8-748d-4bca-beba-3b7bff8296e4/Mangrove-Creek-Dam-Brochure.pdf.aspx
>> …says ‘Mangrove Creek Dam Catchment’
> The problem is that the area we are talking about is not the area in the map you've linked to. What we are talking about is a sub-section of that area that has been protected for the purposes of drinking water supply.
> 
I don’t see any problem with tagging a sub-section of the water catchment in a special way, with added tag restrictions if considered appropriate. 
The landuse=water_catchment does not imply that you have encompassed the entire catchment. 
If naming as ‘Mangrove Creek Dam Catchment’ would imply the entire area. 

I see that individually mapped rural private properties may have portions of each property reserved as protected water_catchment in the future as the country becomes more over populated.
 
>> 
>> 
>> Another I like is reservoir_watershed
>> 
>> 
> Three problems:
> 
> 1. OSM tags are traditionally based on UK English so that'd have to be
>   reservoir_catchment
> 2. This tag has already been used in a bulk import of data for
>   Massachusetts where I assume it means something in Massachusettsan law
> 3. Implies that this represents the entire catchment of a reservoir but
>   we're only talking about a sub-section here.
> 
Yes, I agree that reservoir_watershed and reservoir_catchment implies the entire catchment representation.