> What should we be marking as the "riverbank" - where the water is visible "now", or the defined limits of where it spreads out to in the wet season?
This is an excellent question that applies to Alaska's braided rivers as well. As they are without man-made flood controls or artificial embankments, they run full in the spring, sometimes tearing out trees and even small islands as they go, but shrink to a trickle in the summer and winter. Customarily, we map the maximum extent of the river as riverbank but that leaves a very mistaken impression when one observes such rivers in the summer. On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 5:56 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sat, 8 Sep 2018 at 05:40, Richard <ricoz....@gmail.com> wrote: > >> everything can be handled with waterway=riverbanks at least as well. >> > > Question regarding riverbanks & where they should be marked, thanks? > > Was doing some HOT mapping a little while back in Nepal & the area I was > working on was surrounding a river - sorry, I can't remember the exact > location? > > The imagery I was working of had apparently been taken during the dry > season as the actual river channel with water in it was ~30 - 50 m's wide. > But the wet season river (or possibly flood?) channel was very obviously > ~500 - 700 m's wide. > > What should we be marking as the "riverbank" - where the water is visible > "now", or the defined limits of where it spreads out to in the wet season? > > Thanks > > Graeme > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > 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
