Proposal talk:Intermittent Lake
Comments
Waterway sounds as an linear item to me. Should it not rather be:
- waterarea = intermittent_lake
or
- waterreservour = intermittent_lake
Also the term "intermittent lake" contains a space character, which should be avoided. Therefore "intermittent_lake" would be better.
I agree that waterway should be more of a linear item. For consistency with how we otherwise do lakes, I think this would be better as "natural=intermittent_lake" or something similar (natural = lake:intermittent?). Is this tag for the largest or smallest size of the lake? --Hawke
Why should the space be avoided? It is easier to type than the underscore. I know underscore is usually used in osm tags but i have not found a good reason for it.
Also as areas are made out of closed ways, i dont think we need a new key. Perhaps we could even drop the mention of way in the key altogether, so we'd have water=something. We'd save some confusion and bytes and keystrokes too. --Luka
What about natural=water + some other attribute defining when it appears, similar to Key:access#Access_time_restrictions:. If it isn't clear when it appears (eg spring) it could as well be the same as swamp (natural=marsh, see Map_Features#Natural). Stefanb 08:19, 4 July 2007 (BST)
Can this be also used to mark areas between high and low tide on a beach (wikipedia:Foreshores) -- i.e. make poposal for "location which is flooded at some times but not others"? Ojw 12:53, 4 July 2007 (BST)
Variation on the proposal at: Proposed features/Water cover. Ojw 13:31, 5 July 2007 (BST)
- There also intermittent rivers or streams, especially in arid areas (wadi in English, oued in French) Gummibaerli 11:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Natural
Should be a natural feauter. i.e. natural=intermittent_lake --Skippern 15:38, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Use intermittent=yes instead?
waterways can have this tag and I think it would fit quite well? RicoZ (talk) 13:29, 16 November 2013 (UTC)