[Talk-ca] [OpenStreetMap] #3188: Coastal intermittent water representation - Canvec

[Bégin, Daniel]

Lennard,

I (now) understand that features are discussed on the wiki but decision are taken on Tagging list.  Am I right ?-)

I'll write a note on the wiki water_content page, what else should I do to make things properly?

Daniel

-----Original Message-----
From: talk-ca-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-ca-bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Lennard
Sent: 26 août 2010 14:21
To: talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [Talk-ca] [OpenStreetMap] #3188: Coastal intermittent water representation - Canvec

On 26-8-2010 20:02, Bégin, Daniel wrote:
> Well, what can I say?
>
> the Canadian community agreed on using water_cover proposal almost a year ago and the entire canadian contry is now available in .osm format using this proposal...
>
> What do you think?

I'm fine with either schema. We can always retag our NL stuff, so that's not a factor.

As far as mapnik is concerned, it also makes no difference either way. 
It currently treats all natural=wetland the same, so that's not ideal either. Better support for these tags is needed for both tagging schemes. It's just that I was under the impression that wetland=* had won out over water_cover, not just on the wiki (but who reads that thing? :)) and also in practice.

A note on the water_cover wiki page that the tagging has been adopted for the CanVec conversion and will start to appear in OSM shortly might be helpful. I don't remember, but has this been on the lists?

--
Lennard


_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
Talk-ca at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca