[Tagging] covered definition in the wiki

M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Mon Jul 19 21:56:56 BST 2010

the covered page lists these use-cases:
A. denote that a highway, railway, pedestrian way or waterway passes
under a building or other structure, where it is inappropriate to use
layering as the differentiator between covered and uncovered. or where
"covered" will more clearly define the condition.

-> fine, but why not for those ways passing inside a building?

B. denote that a power line, water main, water drain, etc., in a
narrow trench, has a removable and replaceable covering, allowing for
maintenance, and thus potentially allowing it to be traversed without
a bridge.

-> quite limiting. The "potentially" part is IMHO not good in a
definition. Why must the covering be "removable and replaceable" and
which covering is not "removable" if you put enough effort into it's
removal? Why must the power line, water drain etc. be "in a narrow
trench" ?

C. denote an area such as an underground parking lot, a covered
reservoir/cistern or even such things as an aquarium (e.g., Kelly
Tarlton's, Auckland, NZ), when the covering is not a man-made
structure that would allow layer differentiation.

-> Why shouldn't the covering structure be man made, or does this
exclude just man_made structures where layering cannot solve the
problem (e.g. more than 11 levels)?

I think we should rework this definitions. Comments?


More information about the Tagging mailing list