On 11/01/2008, Michael Collinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Lake > > > >it seems a logical one to me, we need to differentiate between lakes > >and rivers, canals, etc. > > Yes, probably logical if we started from scratch but today it exactly
totally, i realise the tagging system has evolved very quickly form nothing, it's bound to change over time as we learn new things. my tone was probably wrong, that is itself a good reason why the tag was chosen > duplicates natural=water which is very, very widely used - 9421 times no problem, they can all be changed very simply i should think. > according to the Statistics link > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Key:natural, though I suspect > that is out of date. There is also natural=coastline, so there is > another logic too. that is actually pretty logical (for practical reasons) - the alternative would be one area comprising 99% of the world's oceans. using a boundary instead, greatly simplifies things, plus the creation of new oceans/seas is highly unlikely, so once it's done, it's done. on the other hand, new lakes/reservoirs/etc. are a lot more likely, so we need a consistent scheme for adding them. i'm sure there are other good reasons, too _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
