W dniu 06.08.2018 o 01:48, Warin pisze:
On 06/08/18 09:01, Dave Swarthout wrote:
> I would think a good start would be changing the wiki to make it
historic=flood_level, leaving any reference to high (or low) water to
be a waterways thing ie the high tide mark.
Before making any changes in wiki I would like to find final agreement
on that topic.
"Flood level" (highest water table) is usually only one of several
informations we can find on "flood mark". Others can be date of flood,
inscription, etc.
Physical object mapped in OSM is rather mark, not just water/flood level.
So "historic=flood_mark" is probably more generic.
+1
Very sensible IMO.
Yes.
Complication .. a historic king tide combined with a storm event may be
considered a historic flood level.
But 'normal' high tides should be part of the water way tagging system.
This can be sometimes hard to distinguish. But tide+storm I would
consider rather as flood event - probably higher level comparing to
periodic tides.
In such a case we can find in on place two types of marks:
* historic=highwater_mark - with information about periodic highest
water level (no date provided),
* historic=flood_mark - with information about flood event (with date)
So existence of date on such mark could be a good information for proper
tag assignment. I'm not familiar with tides, so please correct me if
this is not the case.
regards
Robert
On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 2:59 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick
<graemefi...@gmail.com <mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 6 August 2018 at 02:48, Robert Szczepanek <rob...@szczepanek.pl
<mailto:rob...@szczepanek.pl>> wrote:
W dniu 05.08.2018 o 12:23, Volker Schmidt pisze:
Flood marks and high water marks are not necessarily the
same thing.
Read
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_water_mark
to get the gist.
There are ordinary high water marks (and I suppose also
the opposite, ordinary low water marks) which are based on
the regular tides in the area.
A flood mark would be a marker for the water level reached
in certain, particular events.
I am not sure about terminology in different
jurisdictions, but the concept seems to be clear to me
that there are two different things we want to tag.
I would like it to be so:
- flood marks as flood signs,
- highwater marks as tide signs.
But even in recent scientific papers this division is not so
clear.
Another issue is that from the beginning, on OSM wiki
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:historic
mark related to floods is described as
historic=highwater_mark
What would be the optimal tagging solution from OSM point of view?
regards
Robert
I would think a good start would be changing the wiki to make it
historic=flood_level, leaving any reference to high (or low) water
to be a waterways thing ie the high tide mark.
Thanks
Graeme
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
--
Dave Swarthout
Homer, Alaska
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
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
