Proposal talk:Moat

I think this would be better as "manmade=moat". --Hawke 20:56, 3 July 2007 (BST)

Half of the existing values for key waterway are man made also, like canal, aqueduct and dock. --Luka
I agree it is specifically manmade, the water in it is natural though. I don't think its a waterway because its not a route that people travel along. Canals are manmade, but there is a waterway along it. The proposal states that its not for middle aged (now dry) moats, but for what reason can't it be used for both? manmade=moat, natural=water could inply that its full, lack of natural= would inply its empty. Linear/Area would both have a use. Ben 02:25, 12 July 2007 (BST)

It should be present as standard feature, and it is water "line" like every other canal, river etc. - it just usually surrounds something, and moats has been used even in world war I (not only middle ages :)) - most of forts has moat (sometimes dry, but then there is nothing special in it and it can be omitted on map) Sauron 21.10.2007
You can find some today in Warsaw. It might be desirable to specify width of the moat. Steelman 09:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I think this is an urgently needed tag. These are very specific areas of water that deserve a specific tag. While I take the point that it is not a waterway that faciltates the flow of water-born traffic, but then neither do covered reservoirs. --Qichina 07:49, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Navigation menu