[Talk-ca] Proposed features water cover / tidal / intermittent

Sam Vekemans acrosscanadatrails at gmail.com
Tue Mar 23 03:41:39 GMT 2010


Hi all,
Im looking at the canvec feature of this (along with the others related)
147011* [image: Way] <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Elements#Way> Single
line watercourse None, non isolated, intermittent waterway=stream;
water=intermittent; name=*; fixme=Feature type and
148007* [image:
Area]<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Elements#Area_.28closed_way_.29>
Waterbody
Watercourse, isolated, intermittent waterway=riverbank; water=intermittent,
name=*
the proposal page is here
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Water_cover
and the canvec feature page is here
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/CanVec:_Hydrography_%28HD%29
...

I worked on a sample here, just outside of Empress, Alberta (in
Saskatchewan) I just guessed on the landuse=meadow; natural=grass (someone
local can fix it) .. with photos.
But for the riverbank etc.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/?minlon=-109.9555934&minlat=50.9222072&maxlon=-109.9224953&maxlat=50.9461371&box=yes

natural=water  (is standard to vaguely describe some type of water)
unfortunately we dont use natural=water;water=lake, but we DO use
natural=wetland ( with wetland=marsh for non-flowing water)
but water=river isn't used.   nor is natural=river used.   yet
waterway=stream is used.
So i think that waterway=tidal should be used, with natural=water.


So for the main river parts (the main waterflow area), i propose
natural=water; waterway=riverbank; name=*; source=*; attribution=* (if
needed)

then for the river banks (the sides where after a rainfall it's not
distinguishable, but in a drout it's a sand area & if left longer plan-life
would grow.   So the water level is 'intermittent'.  Hence the original
value of  water=intermittent,   so i propose
natural=wetland; name*; source=*; attribution=*(if needed)

As tagging it was "natural=wetland" where the polygon is directly inside the
"waterway=riverbank" ... makes this wetland flooded.  So i think it makes
sence.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/53097360

Thanks,
Sam

Twitter: @Acrosscanada
Blog:  http://Acrosscanadatrails.blogspot.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sam.vekemans
Skype: samvekemans
OpenStreetMap IRC: http://irc.openstreetmap.org
@Acrosscanadatrails
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20100322/d80cf392/attachment.html>


More information about the Talk-ca mailing list