I would rather add a specific section in the wiki page about width with the explanations you just provided to make the point clear once for all.
> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 18:28:50 +0300 > From: Eugene Podshivalov yauge...@gmail.com > To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" > tagging@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [Tagging] Drain vs. ditch > Message-ID: > CAEPw1JWMFcpquKJzE4Wp4_r4V6F=fovnq7m-dzzjibsvaiu...@mail.gmail.com > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > There are words in the language which let you distinguish natural waterways > by size, e.g. brook -> stream -> river. > The artifical waterways on the contrary are distinguished maily by usage, > rather than by size: > canal - carry useful water > ditch - melioration chanals which are in contact with the land (soak water > from or into land) > drain - carry away superfluous liquid (and hence are usually lined). > > Canals due to their purpose are usually but not necesserily large, e.g. > some canals in hydro-power generation can be just a couple of meters wide. > Drains and ditches again due to their purpose are usually small. > The only point at which "size" is in the play is when drainage ditches flow > into a larger channel which eventually carries the water away from a field > or when a large channel brings water to a field and distributes it between > irrigation ditches. These large waterways can be called canals probably > because they get some kind of "useful" connotation. > > Maybe we need to delete the "large" and "small" words from the beginning of > definitions at all? > > Cheers, > Eugene _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
