Change the riverbank preset to use "natural"="water" + "water"="river" instead of "waterway"="riverbank".

[BjornRasmussen]

When adding a river's area, iD suggests the preset "riverbank". The preset currently uses "waterway"="riverbank".
According to the wiki:

So, these are equivalent, while natural=water scheme is preferred:

• waterway=riverbank is the same as natural=water + water=river
• landuse=basin is the same as natural=water + water=basin
• landuse=reservoir is the same as natural=water + water=reservoir
• landuse=pond is the same as natural=water + water=pond

Using just the natural=water tagging would allow for much simpler data processing for data consumers, much easier Overpass queries, and more consistency.

[bhousel]

Oh interesting.. I didn't know there were 2 different ways to tag water.. But I do like natural=water+water=* better, for consistency.

Should we just switch them all?

[BjornRasmussen]

Sure! Which others are there? I know that the preset "Reservoir" already uses the water=* system.

[bhousel]

Sure! Which others are there?

I was thinking just 4 listed above..

[Elefant-aus-Wuppertal]

but the problem might be, that the water which is in reservoirs or basins, doesn't have to be a "natural" feature, does it? I know we should not discuss this here bit in my opinion, "natural" is the right key only for some "water" features.

[BjornRasmussen]

Yeah, I see what you mean. A lot of keys in OpenStreetMap that don't make sense. For example, landuse=grass is not landuse, and neither is landuse=reservoir. Also, highway=street_lamp is not a highway.

Anyway, according to the wiki,

Note that despite key name it is also used for artificial structures like moats, basins of a wastewater treatment plants, canals etc.

Although the natural=water tag is confusing in artificial water bodies, I think that the benefit of consistency outweighs the disadvantage of confusing tag names.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

[bhousel]

I did this. I also added a preset for natural=water + water=stream, although it is not mentioned on the wiki on the natural=water page or mentioned on the discussion page.

This is to keep things consistent with

• natural=water + water=river "A body of river. Should contain waterway=river way inside."
• natural=water + water=canal "A body of a canal, a man-made channel for water. Should contain waterway=canal way inside."

Anyway, somebody should update the wiki page, thanks.

[jjiglesiasg]

This changes do not need to be discussed?
landuse=basin is for STORMWATERS a total different subjet than natural=water
waterway=riverbanks are variable amplitudes of water even intermitent, when main water=river is a permanent one. Suddenly they are changing the preset without any advise or consult to the Mappers.
I dissagre with this kind of behaviour if undisscussed....

[jjiglesiasg]

From the Wiki:
Do not:
a) tag objects with both variants (waterway=riverbank+natural=water)
b) tag parent relations with natural=water
c) convert from waterway=riverbank to natural=water tagging scheme (or vice verso) without a good reason because doing so can be very tricky and trigger errors which are not easily visible and not reported by QA tools. For example, it must be assured that the use of natural=riverbank/natural=water is consistent in parent and child relations.

[BjornRasmussen]

I don't see how this change violates anything, so please explain if I am wrong.

landuse=basin is for STORMWATERS a total different subject than natural=water

Perhaps, but by definition, the tags natural=water + water=basin mean the exact same thing as landuse=basin according to the wiki. The same is true regarding riverbanks.

I dissagre with this kind of behaviour if undisscussed.

This is not really something that should need to be discussed, since the water=* system has already been approved separately, meaning that this is simply just changing a preset to match existing features. This discussion you have started really has nothing to do with iD, and all to do with the water=* proposal. Perhaps it would be better to contact the person who created that proposal.

[BjornRasmussen]

convert from waterway=riverbank to natural=water tagging scheme (or vice verso) without a good reason because doing so can be very tricky and trigger errors which are not easily visible and not reported by QA tools.

What errors could arise from changing a preset? Could you give examples? In my opinion, gradually phasing out waterway=riverbank would actually reduce double tagging errors (if that is what you mean by errors).

[bhousel]

This changes do not need to be discussed?

It was discussed here and @BjornRasmussen linked to the wiki pages where plenty of discussion happened going back years. You'll notice we also let the issue sit for a month to see if anyone would show up with a good reason to leave the presets along. To be honest, if I knew there were better ways to tag these things, I would have switched these presets years ago.

From the Wiki: Do not:
a) tag objects with both variants (waterway=riverbank+natural=water)
b) tag parent relations with natural=water
c) convert from waterway=riverbank to natural=water tagging scheme (or vice verso) without a good reason

for a) we don't do that.
for b) we only do that if the parent relation is a multipolygon, but obviously the wiki author didn't think too deeply about parent relations when they wrote that.
for c) we aren't converting anything, but mappers can do this if they want to. Putting all the water features under natural=water is a "good reason".

Also... I say this a lot, but you really need to read everything on the wiki with extreme skepticism. I'm considering just locking any issue that contains a phrase like "According to the wiki.."

[BjornRasmussen]

This is not really something that should need to be discussed

I meant contacting the tagging@ list. GitHub is also a great place for discussion.