On Friday 18 October 2013, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > If you think this information is completely unreliable you can of > > course ignore it all together. But keep in mind the river/stream > > distinction is not an importance rating, therefore it is fully > > possible for a river to run into a stream. > > this discussion belongs into tagging (pulling it there). > > I always saw the distinction as an importance rating actually. Where > do you get your idea from? A river running into a stream would make > no sense to me.
As discussed previously stream is defined by width and of course the width of a waterway can decrease along its course - both through actual water loss by evaporation/seepage (not relevant in Norway) as well as due to terrain (for example a waterway being relatively wide and shallow on a flat upland while becomming narrow and deep in a narrow valley further downstream). And even if you'd change the definition of river/stream to represent importance this could never be locally verifiable and globally consistent at the same time. -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
