[Tagging] mast / tower / communication_tower (again)

[Jonathon Rossi]

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 5:34 PM Lionel Giard <lionel.giard at gmail.com> wrote:

> The problem i see with that "multipurpose" value is that it give no
> information and could be misused for other tower:type (like
> defensive;observation) which should not be rendered as communication_tower.
> Thus i would propose to render the "communication_tower" based on the
> height > 250 m (arbitrary value for example) when in combination with
> tower:type=communication (even when others tower:type are mentioned like in
> your example : "tower:type=communication;observation"). I don't know if it
> is feasible for the renderer to identify the presence of only one value in
> the tag ? Otherwise i suppose it would need to put all alternative
> available... :s
>

Rather than trying to make up information (in the renderer) based on a
tower type or arbitrary height, wouldn't it be better to just indicate if
the tower is useful as a navigation aid and seen from a distance? Towers on
a mountain might not reach the arbitrary height but are still one of these
big towers because the surrounding area is much lower?

My first thought was some sort of "landmark=yes" tag, there is already a
"denotation=landmark" tag for trees, however it appears like there might
have been a landmark tag in the past that was deprecated, and I realise
that it would be a stupid tag because you'd have to tag everything.

My next thought was to apply "tourism=viewpoint", however that assumes
public access to enter the tower. The Eiffel Tower is tagged
"tourism=attraction" and "tower:type=communication;observation". Could
tourism=attraction be a good option, it indicates something for tourists
(or locals) to go and check out a bit like tourism=viewpoint even if you
can only see it from the ground and can't go inside?

Regarding mast vs tower, I've generally tagged buildings as towers (i.e.
you can enter them even if just a staircase) and non-buildings as a mast
(including a free standing metal or concrete pole with comms equipment
mounted atop). I don't really mind, but a clear definition is definitely
needed because I was unsure until I looked around at a heap of examples and
just went with the building/non-building distinction.

-- 
Jono
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20181009/9a568293/attachment.html>