[Tagging] airport vs. aerodrome

David Murn davey at incanberra.com.au
Wed Feb 16 06:47:25 GMT 2011

On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 13:24 +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:02 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
> <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> >(I know, don't tag for the renderers
> Can we just ban that ridiculous, misquoted and harmful commandment?
> Taking into account renderer support for current and proposed tags is
> perfectly appropriate.

I think the analogy was more about things like landuse=commercial to
make the renderer render a yellow area for sand, or landuse=forest to
make a parkland render green.

> I'm not in favour of splitting aerodrome into aerodrome and airport if
> it doesn't scale to further divisions. It just introduces another
> English word which will cause more quibbles about what aerodrome is vs
> what an airport is.

Well, wikipedia defines an airport as a place aircraft take off and land
and may be stored or maintained, while aerodrome is a location where
flight operations can take place.  Consider a seaplane landing area,
this could be designated as an aerodrome area, without being an airport.
A remote airstrip may be considered an aerodrome, without having any
sort of status as an airport.  Some remote roadhouses in central
Australia for example, have an aerodrome out-the-back for light aircraft
that are hopping across the country or flying doctors or even local
resident operations.


More information about the Tagging mailing list