Waterway sounds as an linear item to me. Should it not rather be:
- waterarea = lake
- waterreservour = lake
- Whats the difference between waterarea=lake and natural=water? Ramack 20:47, 3 July 2007 (BST)
- Agreed, this doesn't give us anything new vs. natural=water. --Hawke 20:57, 3 July 2007 (BST)
- I'm personally fine with natural=water too, but I would like to see an associated name=* be rendered. --Cohort 05:27, 4 July 2007 (BST)
- This seems pointless, especially since lakes here are called lochs. Bruce89 15:32, 4 July 2007 (BST)
- Under the highway key there are also many node tags. Under the aeroway there is an area too. Of all water features only spring (a node feature) and water (generic) are in the natural key. I'd say move spring to waterway too. What it gets us is we can distinguish between any kind of water area and a lake.
- What about water=lake?
- Not much different than natural=water, is it? Stefanb 08:36, 4 July 2007 (BST)
- natural=water is already there and widely used. Let's stick with it. The names and values of tags don't really matter that much, so long as we all use the same ones, and it means work in all the renderers and editors to change it, for no useful gain. --David.earl 13:57, 4 July 2007 (BST)
- the problem with natural=water is that it's vague, it says nothing about what the item actually is. a river, stream, lake, canal, sea, waterfall, pond? also, as we have a separate top-level tag for waterway, all water-related items really need to be in it, or it serves no purpose. grouping them together allows someone to very easily perform some task on all water items
all items tagged with natural=water can easily be re=tagged with something more descriptive, if the tags are not there we can create them Myfanwy 02:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- IS this for natural lakes or created ones ? I personally would find water=ornamental useufl for
ones in gardens.. ShakespeareFan00 21:20, 19 February 2008 (UTC)