Talk:Tag:historic=highwater mark

what tag to use?

i can see pages with high water mark or flood mark tag with good combination tag to use but not on this page. We need to find what tag to use. -Yod4z (talk) 17:13, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Do you mean flood_mark=* (216 uses) and high_water_mark=* (20 uses)? I like more historic=highwater_mark (38 uses) as it is in historic namespace. But the docs here would need to be improved, which I can do, if we decide to prefer this tag. Chrabros (talk) 02:41, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Regarding value (term) I prefer flood_mark as simpler, shorter and easier to understand for non-hydrologists. We have started also with high_water_mark, but found this term ambiguous. High-water mark is more popular in US, while flood mark in EU (http://floodlist.com/dealing-with-floods/flood-high-water-marks).

Agree, historic namespace is better. But we can't mix historic=flood_mark with memorial:type=*, as it requires historic=memorial. So I propose to duplicate selected memorial:type=*, and create flood_mark:type=* with additional values, like painted for painted directly (on walls, ...).

Deprecated OSM wiki pages should be deleted or just redirected? We have ongoing flood project, so after final agreement can work on that. --Cracert (talk) 11:10, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

maybe add info like on page amenity=fire_hydrant to page to don't use anymore. I like the name flood mark, it's clear and comprehensive in any language --Yod4z (talk) 16:50, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Found also memorial:type=flood_mark

--Pyrog (talk) 22:13, 15 February 2022 (UTC)

I think historic=highwater_mark is the best one from used tags. They are not exactly memorials like statues or plaques and they're sometimes really small, like the one on the illustration. They sometimes just a painting on a wall. maro21 21:41, 6 April 2022 (UTC)