On 17/01/2016 1:12 PM, Nev Wedding wrote:
On 17 Jan 2016, at 11:28 AM, Andrew Davidson <u...@internode.on.net> wrote:
On 16/01/16 11:47, Nev Wedding wrote:
Though I don’t know the area you refer to, I feel landuse=water_catchment is an
excellent choice and is the correct tag for an area that has a capture of water
as specific defined use as already stated on
https://www.wyong.nsw.gov.au/getmedia/7ca695e8-748d-4bca-beba-3b7bff8296e4/Mangrove-Creek-Dam-Brochure.pdf.aspx
…says ‘Mangrove Creek Dam Catchment’
The problem is that the area we are talking about is not the area in the map
you've linked to.
It is at least a substantial proportion of it.
Note that the map also has the 'Mangrove Creek Weir Catchment' area that has a
similar colour, abuts one boundary
and some others areas (those are better differentiated colour wise) too.
What we are talking about is a sub-section of that area that has been
protected for the purposes of drinking water supply.
I don’t see any problem with tagging a sub-section of the water catchment in a
special way, with added tag restrictions if considered appropriate.
The landuse=water_catchment does not imply that you have encompassed the entire
catchment.
If naming as ‘Mangrove Creek Dam Catchment’ would imply the entire area.
A roadway can be tagged in subsections. Even if a subsection is omitted .. the
remainder are valid entries and each sub section carries the name.
I don't agree with the asserted 'implication'.
I see that individually mapped rural private properties may have portions of
each property reserved as protected water_catchment in the future as the
country becomes more over populated.
In the UK many farms are in 'water catchment' areas.
This is a problem for tagging 'landuse' .. many areas are used for more than
one thing.
A solution may come out of development of other tags by the tag tagging group
(ref RFC - Discourage amenity=public_building).
If you want to explore what is going on in the UK .. a starting point is
http://environment.data.gov.uk/catchment-planning/
A possibly shorter start would be
https://www.nwl.co.uk/your-home/environment/catchment-management.aspx
Basically they want any run off or sub soil water to be up to a certain
standard, not carrying too much pollution within the water catchment area.
Another I like is reservoir_watershed
Three problems:
1. OSM tags are traditionally based on UK English so that'd have to be
reservoir_catchment
Some don't have a reservoir but simply use the local river/s (e.g. see
https://www.nwl.co.uk/your-home/environment/catchment-management.aspx).
So reservoir_catchment does not 'work' for all.
"Water Catchment" is used in the UK
http://www.ofwat.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/prs_inf_catchment.pdf
watershed? One definition; and area or ridge of land that separates water
flowing into different rivers. So that definitely does not fit.
2. This tag has already been used in a bulk import of data for
Massachusetts where I assume it means something in Massachusettsan law
3. Implies that this represents the entire catchment of a reservoir but
we're only talking about a sub-section here.
Yes, I agree that reservoir_watershed and reservoir_catchment implies the
entire catchment representation.
highway=motorway ... implies the entire motorway?
I don't think so.
Some are tagging individual farm fields ... that are not the entire farm.
I don't 'see' the implication that any tagged area or way has to be the entire
thing even if named.
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
