[Tagging] mast / tower / communication_tower (again)

Lionel Giard lionel.giard at gmail.com
Fri Oct 5 07:31:35 UTC 2018


I also support this simplification of definition and tags.

Is there a possibility to indicate that a tower is specifically a landmark
with a tag of some sort without knowing the height (most of them are not
publicly known around here) ? Because some are really useful for navigation
(visible from a long way) while other are only visible from up close.

I was personally using the communication_tower tag only to indicate that it
is a landmark when it is an especially huge tower (and that was the only
difference between a tower and this, to me).

Le ven. 5 oct. 2018 à 08:42, Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefitz1 at gmail.com> a
écrit :

>
>
>
> On Fri, 5 Oct 2018 at 16:17, Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Sounds sensible to me. If JOSM and ID support man_made=tower +
>> tower:type=communication with a preset, it won't be any more work than
>> typing in a single tag.
>>
>
> Can confirm that it's preset in iD, as I've just mapped one (a mobile
> phone tower) but don't know about JOSM (or anything else)?
>
>
>> Does this require a proposal process? How does something become
>> officially deprecated?
>>
>
> Yep, that's the other question!
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20181005/970f10ef/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list