[Talk-us] Proposed cleanup: NHD "rivers"

James U jumbanho at gmail.com
Sun Mar 20 23:42:13 GMT 2011

1 and 2 make sense to me.  What criteria would you use for 2?  I have 
done a fair bit of NHD imports and simply used the name, i.e. XXXX river, 
to classify rivers.  Some parts of the country have different naming 
traditions that others.

What is the rationale for 3?  

On Sunday, March 20, 2011 05:29:54 pm Paul Norman wrote:
> A mapnik rendering change has revealed a problem in some areas with 
> imported waterways. An example of the problem is at
> Essentially, all the streams are tagged as waterway=river, with
> waterway=stream being used for what appear to be intermittent 
> I propose doing the following changes. These changes would *only* be 
> to ways that have not been modified since import. I have experience 
> this type change from cleanup on Canadian NHN data.
> 1. Adding intermittent=yes to NHD streams.
> 2. Downgrading waterway=river to waterway=stream for non-rivers.
> 3. Joining rivers into a single way
> Steps 1 and 2 would be done in one set of imports while joining rivers
> would be done in a second pass.
> Spot checks in the area linked indicate this would cause no problems. 
> verification with imagery was necessary I'd use MapQuest's Open Aerial 
> as it seems to be the highest quality in these remote areas.
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

More information about the Talk-us mailing list