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

[Warin]

On 17/01/2016 1:12 PM, Nev Wedding wrote:
> 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.

It is at least a substantial proportion of it.
Note that the map also has the 'Mangrove Creek Weir Catchment' area that has a similar colour, abuts one boundary
and some others areas (those are better differentiated colour wise) too.

>>   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.

A roadway can be tagged in subsections. Even if a subsection is omitted .. the remainder are valid entries and each sub section carries the name.
I don't agree with the asserted 'implication'.

>
> 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.

In the UK many farms are in 'water catchment' areas.
This is a problem for tagging 'landuse' .. many areas are used for more than one thing.
A solution may come out of development of other tags by the tag tagging group (ref RFC - Discourage amenity=public_building).

If you want to explore what is going on in the UK .. a starting point is http://environment.data.gov.uk/catchment-planning/

A possibly shorter start would be https://www.nwl.co.uk/your-home/environment/catchment-management.aspx
Basically  they want any run off or sub soil water to be up to a certain standard, not carrying too much pollution within the water catchment area.


>   
>>>
>>> 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

Some don't have a reservoir but simply use the local river/s (e.g. see https://www.nwl.co.uk/your-home/environment/catchment-management.aspx).

So reservoir_catchment does not 'work' for all.

"Water Catchment" is used in the UK http://www.ofwat.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/prs_inf_catchment.pdf

watershed? One definition; and area or ridge of land that separates water flowing into different rivers. So that definitely does not fit.




>> 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.

highway=motorway ... implies the entire motorway?

I don't think so.

Some are tagging individual farm fields ... that are not the entire farm.
I don't 'see' the implication that any tagged area or way has to be the entire thing even if named.