[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (man_made=silo)

Pieren pieren3 at gmail.com
Tue Aug 20 15:02:48 UTC 2013


On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Bryce Nesbitt <bryce2 at obviously.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Pieren <pieren3 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> No, the name of the facility and operator shouldn't go on the silo but
>> on the polygon or node identifying the facility.
>
>
> Exactly: this is where the voting process is useful, hashing issues out like
> this rather than just making unilateral edits.
>
>
> There are plenty of standalone silos where the facility and the silo are one
> and the same.  Insisting on a facility polygon to the fence lines is not
> done for buildings, water towers, post offices, radar stations or other
> features.  Thus I'm not sure why silo would be treated differently.  Thus
> this seems like a valid tagging discussion that should happen at a different
> level, no?

Sorry, we left the ML by accident.

I guess the difference is that a silo is a subpart of a more prominent
feature (facility, farm, plant, quarry, etc). Compared to your post
office example, it's like saying the near postbox or telephon should
have the name of the post office because the post office is not mapped
at the moment.

Pieren



More information about the Tagging mailing list