[Tagging] Avoid using place=locality - find more specific tags instead
daveswarthout at gmail.com
Tue Apr 16 10:50:12 UTC 2019
Joseph wrote: We recently discussed place=locality, and I now believe this
should be avoided, and perhaps deprecated."
I cannot agree.
In the case of Alaska, these named places are so remote that there is no
chance of me (or any other OSM mapper for that matter), ever doing a survey
to determine if those place names are in use by locals (trappers hunters,
canoeists) or not. I'm willing to change my tagging practices and ADD a new
and better designed tag reflecting the status of such places as can best be
determined from DigitalGlobe imagery but I am certainly not going to remove
the place=locality tag from them.
Warin's question is also relevant: what about place=island or place=islet?
FYI, Alaska currently has more than 500K nodes, 5646 ways and 186 relations
that represent either a place=island or place=islet and I'm still adding
more of them daily.
@MarKus: Regarding the tagging of islands or lake groups (clusters), I've
already begun to use the type=group tag and hope that someone will push
OSM-Carto to render such relations in the future.
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 5:26 AM Markus <selfishseahorse at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 09:40, Joseph Eisenberg
> <joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Two of the examples need new tags created:
> > 3 lakes with a name: needs a new tag, perhaps natural=lake_group as a
> > multipolygon relation?
> There is already a proposed and used type=group relation for all kind
> of named groups:
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
Chiang Mai, Thailand
Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging