Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

waterway=stream + tunnel=flooded isn't rendered as a tunnel #5006

Closed
Nekzuris opened this issue Aug 21, 2024 · 6 comments
Closed

waterway=stream + tunnel=flooded isn't rendered as a tunnel #5006

Nekzuris opened this issue Aug 21, 2024 · 6 comments

Comments

@Nekzuris
Copy link

waterway=stream + tunnel=culvert ✔️
waterway=canal+ tunnel=flooded ✔️
waterway=stream + tunnel=flooded ❌ is rendered as a normal stream, should be tunnel

@imagico
Copy link
Collaborator

imagico commented Aug 22, 2024

Thanks for the suggestion.

waterway=stream + tunnel=flooded is used <1000 times with many use cases clearly synonyms for the more common tunnel=culvert.

We render waterway=canal + tunnel=flooded with a tunnel signature since #4087, it is now predominantly and very consistently used for Qanats, which calls for addressing #3354.

Closing this as wontfix/duplicate of #3179 - since we made the decision in #4087 to selectively only support tunnel=flooded on waterway=canal. Should tagging practice change this can be re-assessed.

As said before a more comprehensive look at the whole artificial water infrastructure domain and how to render this in a consistent and differentiated fashion would be very desirable - see in particular #3180, #3354, #4405 and #4087 (review)

@imagico imagico closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Aug 22, 2024
@Nekzuris
Copy link
Author

Nekzuris commented Sep 1, 2024

I don't understand how you can defend the idea that something tagged as tunnel=* should be rendered like an open river, even if the tag has low usage.

There are very legitimate cases of waterway=stream + tunnel=flooded, but obviously, if you render them as visibly as an open river, mappers will change them to tunnel=culvert because it spoils the map.
waterway=canal + tunnel=flooded would be a closer synonym, but since you don't take its width into consideration and small canals are rendered as big ship canals, it doesn't work either.

@imagico
Copy link
Collaborator

imagico commented Sep 1, 2024

I don't understand how you can defend the idea that something tagged as tunnel=* should be rendered like an open river, even if the tag has low usage.

We render tags, not keys. And i have explained that currently tunnel=flooded is - in combination with waterway=stream - predominantly used as a synonym for tunnel=culvert. I am not sure what is not understandable about that.

As said there are <1000 uses of that tag combination, there is no documentation on what this combination is supposed to mean, You have provided no example of how the tag is used in a distinctly meaningful way or a description of how you think the tag should be used that we are supposed to support with our rendering. That IMO leaves zero basis to even consider supporting it at this time.

Regarding rendering of waterway=canal - we already have #3354 for that. Contributions there are welcome, previous discussion there points into various directions where this might go.

@Nekzuris
Copy link
Author

Nekzuris commented Sep 1, 2024

This is a small flooded tunnel coming from a small dam that diverts part of a small stream into an artificial lake.

@imagico
Copy link
Collaborator

imagico commented Sep 1, 2024

I don't think it is anywhere close to global consensus to map penstocks as waterway=stream. If it is in your local community then you should document that somewhere. Right now neither the English nor the French wiki page on waterway=stream suggest anything in that direction.

@Nekzuris
Copy link
Author

Nekzuris commented Sep 1, 2024

You're right, it should be a canal because it's artificial, but since it's only a fraction of a stream less than a meter in width, the current rendering isn't appropriate. I think the tunnel is 0.3m in width.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants