On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 04:08:12PM +0200, David Marchal wrote: > > > > Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 14:18:37 +0200 > > From: ricoz....@gmail.com > > To: tagging@openstreetmap.org > > Subject: Re: [Tagging] Modelling the relation between a waterstream and one > > of its resurgence > > missing data should not prevent the mapping of known good data. If it has > > been established as > > the "main route" than it is fine to map that. We have rivers with side > > channels and branches > > that aren't completely mapped either. > > Yes, but if I try to map these waterways as a single one, it will no longer > represent the official modelling of the stream, which is: two separate > streams, one meeting the other on a downstream section. Modelling them as one > would destroy the current modelling, so how can I map the connection without > altering the current data?
in that case you would need to decide between real world and official modelling. Although drawing a waterway-line between them does not necesarilly mean they are no longer separate. Maybe connect them with a way and tag it as waterway=carstic_flow? > > Not much different from confluence points of large rivers? > Well, the stream feeded by the other is 126 km long, and it's spring, > resurgence of the other, is around 50 km away from the second so it can't be > just modelled as a branch of the other. it happens quite often that river change names along their course, how is that done with the river relation? Maybe something similar could be done here? Richard _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
