[Tagging] What about a disused quarry and historic surface mining?
61sundowner at gmail.com
Mon Jan 9 21:15:37 UTC 2017
On 10-Jan-17 07:56 AM, ksg wrote:
>> Am 09.01.2017 um 21:23 schrieb ael <law_ence.dev at ntlworld.com>:
>> On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 02:00:58PM +0100, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
>>> Please do not use "disused=yes" as it is considered troll-tagging, first
>>> saying it is simething, and in the next line negating it.
> +1 That’s what the life cycle prefix is intended for.
>> I don't think that is a natural interpretation. It is perfectly clear in
>> the case of a disused quarry. It is still a quarry. But it is no longer
>> in use. In a few cases it may have a new purpose, but it is still a
>> quarry in any normal sense.
> No, if there there no more mining, exploitation or landfill activities, the former quarry is a geological outcrop at best.
>> I think I tried disused:landuse=quarry, but as I recall it was then not
>> rendered on the standard map. I am all against tagging for the renderer
>> in principle, but when such major features are not shown, it is
>> ridiculous and a hazard. Theses particular quarries have sheer faces
>> some of which are not fenced off.
> You might use man_made=embankment for them. Don’t use natural=cliff, as these features are not of natural origin.
The 'natural' key is used for both 'natural' and 'unnatural' objects!
For example 'wood' is used where the trees have been grown from manually collected seed in an artificial light, automatically provided watering with liquid food, within a temperature and humidity controlled environment, and then manually planted out.
Another example is 'water' used in so many man made dammed areas.
In general a cliff is more vertical and taller than an embankment.
>>> The landuse tag should describe the current use, not the former.
>> In the cases that I was examining, the current use is "disused_quarry“.
> I would opt for describing the subsequent use like recreation, natural, leisure etc.
I would opt for the present use... recreation?
If unused at present then the disused: etc would be practical.
Possibly both past and present use can be tagged together.
More information about the Tagging