Those descriptions look good On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 5:58 PM Eugene Podshivalov <yauge...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here is a summary of the discussion to check if there is a consensus. > > Current definitions of artificial waterways are unclear and ambiguous. > Some people assume that ditch and drain differ mainly in size, others > differentiate them mainly on liquid type (can or cannot carry industrial > discharge), others rely on lined or unlined characteristic. > > It is suggested to resolve the ambiguities by updating the definitions as > follows. > > canal - Large man-made open flow (free flow vs pipe flow) waterways used > to carry useful water for transportation, hydro-power generation, > irrigation or land drainage purposes. Consider using waterway=ditch for > small irrigation or land drainage channels. Consider using waterway=drain > for small usually lined superflous liquid drainage channels. > > drain - Small artificial free flow waterways usually lined with concrete > or similar used for carrying away superflous liquid like rain water or > industrial discharge without letting it soak into the ground. Consider > using waterway=ditch for unlined channels used to drain nearby wet land. > Consider using waterway=canal for large unlined land drainage channels. > > ditch - Small artificial free flow waterways used for irrigating dry land > or draining wet land. Irrigation ditches can be lined or unlined, drainage > ditches are usually unlined to let water soak through the land into them. > Ditches may have short lined segments at waterway turning points or > intersections with roads or paths to prevent erosion. Consider using > waterway=canal for large irrigation or land drainage channels. Consider > using waterway=drain for usually lined superflous liquid drainage channels. > > Cheers, > Eugene > > вт, 29 янв. 2019 г. в 18:32, marc marc <marc_marc_...@hotmail.com>: > >> Le 29.01.19 à 16:13, Eugene Podshivalov a écrit : >> > How to we proceed with this topic? Should a proposal be created or the >> > wiki pages can be updated straight away by someone or myself based on >> > this discussion? >> >> maybe it's a good idea to write a small-summary-only post >> to check if there is a consensus on this, because there are probably >> many participants who have dropped out given the number of emails that >> the subject has generated >> _______________________________________________ >> Tagging mailing list >> Tagging@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >> > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
