sent from a phone
> On 25. Apr 2019, at 18:45, Volker Schmidt <vosc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The Rhine downstream from Basel and to Bingen has been re-bedded nearly > completely (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_Rhine) and, by the above > arguments, should be re-tagged as canal, which seems absurd. > So maybe the concepts ar not as well defined as I thought. this is true for a lot of other rivers as well. I think the distinction is whether the bed is still somewhere near the old position, then it is not considered a canal, while a waterway that cuts through the natural topology and diverts water into areas where there wouldn’t normally be, or in directions it wouldn’t normally flow, then it is clearly a canal (intended on the scale of the waterway, not just locally). Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
