having 2 key with the same meaning is not a good thing. I'm in favor of deprecing service=irrigation in favor of usage=irrigation, more consistent with other usage=* values used on other waterways.
Le 03.06.19 à 22:19, François Lacombe a écrit : > Hi all > > Regarding the particular situation of service vs usage keys, JOSM team > wonders if service may be moved to usage > https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/17770 > > Don't blame them on "deprecate" word, which should be understood as > "discouraged". > Question is "Should we keep service in use for destination of water > leading in man made waterways?" > > All the best > > François > > Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 22:41, François Lacombe <fl.infosrese...@gmail.com > <mailto:fl.infosrese...@gmail.com>> a écrit : > > Hi > > I agree with aqueduct as a system composed of bridges, tunnels, > pipes and canal (not only a bridge crossing a valley). > > Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 16:10, Mateusz Konieczny > <matkoni...@tutanota.com <mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com>> a écrit : > > I think that in this case, with only > > usage=headrace > waterway=canal > > tags even a perfect renderer would have a trouble. > > > That's right > It misses a structure > Tunnel and bridge can eventually help respectively for underground > and overhead situations. > Another key or value have to be determined to describe overground > lining (and other possibilities) > > If the canal have a constant width, it can be added with width=* > referring to water width at its surface > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
