[OSM-talk] Failed water proposal reversal

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2016-06-22 13:18 GMT+02:00 Tomas Straupis <tomasstraupis at gmail.com>:

> > I am generally against such harsh measures, if a new way to tag
> > has advantages, it has them even if only 20% of applicable objects
> > are tagged with it. And 20% endorsement isn't actually a fail IMHO.
>
>   So after a new scheme to tag X is introduced we have two schemes
> valid at the same time and if the new one only gets 20% in two years
> you suggest to continue with TWO ways to map THE SAME thing? How would
> you explain this to data consumers?
>


the question is not "mapping the same thing", but conveying the same
semantics, which is a whole lot different, and can rarely - if ever so far
- be found.



>
> >> P.S. This only influences proposals which are CHANGING tagging.
> > so it would not apply to the water tag, because it doesn't change
> > tagging but is an amendment?
>
>   Water proposal tried to change the tagging:
>   landuse=reservoir => natural=water|water=reservoir
>


that's really different, one is an attribute about the usage of land, the
other is a feature for where there is actually water.



>   And in general all water landuse=x => natural=water|water=x (basin, pond
> etc.)
>   waterway=riverbank => natural=water|water=riverbank
>


yes, the way riverbank was used in OSM is replaced by natural=water,
water=riverbank seems a bad tag indeed, if still used for the actual river
area and not for the riverbank alone.


Cheers,
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20160622/75792226/attachment.html>