[Tagging] tagging towers WAS Re: tall masts supported by guy wires

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/9/11 Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com>:
> On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 11:39 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2010/9/11 Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com>:
>>> It's a guyed tower.
>>
>> a tower is "self-supporting", which might be read as contradictory to
>> guys (unless you consider the guys being part of the tower itself).
>
> Then explain the heavy use of "guyed tower" by professionals:
> http://www.google.com/search?q=%22guyed+tower%22
> You may be using the dictionary definition of tower (though the
> dictionaries I checked don't rule out guy wires on a tower), but it's
> apparently not a distinction that's always made in the real world.


well, probably a "guyed tower" is a such (complete term) and not a
"tower". A tower can (structurally) usually be regarded a cantilevered
system, see this schema:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/0/09/Eulerfaelle1.png (the
first case on the left).

I'm not really (at this point of the discussion) objecting against
tagging those (with appropriate subtags) as man_made=tower in OSM, but
I wanted to raise the awareness that it is structurally not correct.
We might discuss this and come to the conclusion, that for simplicity
reasons we might still tag these as tower.

What do you think about the changes to tower:construction and
suggested extended subtagging?

cheers,
Martin