On 11 March 2017 at 23:54, Thilo Haug <[email protected]> wrote: > in my opinion, this combination is describing it best : > natural=water > water=pond
I don't like this, as I feel pond is "more commonly used for places in a park where you find ducks, often with lots of vegetation", and the water would cover a larger area, and not be flowing as much as a pool. On 12 March 2017 at 01:21, ael <[email protected]> wrote: >> in my opinion, this combination is describing it best : >> natural=water >> water=pond > > As a native English speaker, these are not ponds. Pools are the natural > description, as already suggested. So just add natural=water, water=pool > to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:water, and tag accordingly. > The existing tags do not cover these pools. That was the plan, but I wanted to see what others thought and see if there was a consensus first. On 13 March 2017 at 19:14, Martin Koppenhoefer <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 12 Mar 2017, at 16:35, althio <[email protected]> wrote: >> If you don't need a new tag, I would go for >> natural=water >> water=lake >> (and let the size and position of the feature show that it is a small >> body of water on a river) >> After all, it is a kind of lake, only much smaller ;) > no, it's not a kind of lake similar like 3 trees can never be a kind of > forest. Both a lake and a forest require a certain size in order to develop > the ecosystem that characterizes them. I agree, a lake and this kind of stream pool are fundamentally different. natural=water is the common element already. On 13 March 2017 at 19:22, Martin Koppenhoefer <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd rather use water=stream_pool without the lake deviation, but then it > still is in conflict with water=river. Are these actual features anyway, or > are they simply the wider parts of the river? My view is that a river has enough flow and is wide enough tag as an area with waterway=riverbank or water=river. So you wouldn't really get these pools on a river. A stream on the otherhand might only be able to be tagged as a linear way in most sections as the water doesn't collect, except for a pool along the lake. (ie. a pool / stream pool). Further the pool usually isn't flowing in the same way as the creek, so I don't think it makes sense to tag as a stream area (a stream area, would be mostly rock, not water). I'm not fussed with water=stream_pool or water=pool. I agree with althio that water=stream_pool is more explicit, and water=pool could be confused with a reflecting pool, swimming pool, On 11 March 2017 at 20:24, Andrew Harvey <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm looking for a tag for "A small and rather deep collection of (usually) > fresh water, as one supplied by a spring, or occurring in the course of a > stream;" https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pool#English also like > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_pool. > > They come in all shapes and sizes but are usually part of a stream/creek > where it is deep enough for water to collect there. > > Some photo examples: > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/32171903253/in/datetaken-public/ > https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/32986671125/in/datetaken-public/ > https://www.flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/25031837975/in/datetaken-public/ > > It's not a lake which is much larger. > > I don't think it's right to use water=pond, which is "man-made in most > cases", and seems to be more commonly used for places in a park where you > find ducks, often with lots of vegetation. > > water=pool seems like the best option. Here is Australia at least a lot of > them have a name like "... Pool". But since it's undocumented I'm not sure > what the 226 current uses of the tag are. > > What's the process for working out if this is the best choice, and if it > turns out to be documenting it on the wiki? _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
