[Tagging] Avoid using place=locality - find more specific tags instead
joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Wed Apr 17 23:52:23 UTC 2019
> I checked the local situation, and found the following:
> Spring Valley: is it a valley? No, it's a former rural railway stop.
It’s not also a valley? It’s common for “XXX Valley” to be 3 related
features which can be mapped with 2 or 3 nodes if they are not exactly
centered at the same place: 1) the name and center of a landform
2) the name and center of a settlement or abandoned settlement and 3) the
name and location of a train station.
abandoned:railway=station would work if there is still physical remains of
Hutton Settlement: is it a hamlet? No, it's an orphanage.
If it is still an orphanage there is amenity=social_facility but perhaps it
is an abandoned:amenity or repurposed? A residential institution could also
be a place=isolated_dwelling if it is not part of a larger settlement
Hazelwood: is it a forest? No, it's a former hamlet.
If there are still buildings or abandoned infrastructure it could be an
Ohio Junction: Is it a highway junction? No, it's where the
> century-abandoned Ohio Match railway line met what is now the Union
> Pacific railway line.
So abandoned:railway=junction of there is still physical evidence? Though
perhaps not after 100 years
> My point is that you can't tell what sort of thing something is from
> its name (or worse, from a translation of its name
Sure, that’s why I didn’t attempt to re-tag any of the objects that I
reviewed. Only local mappers are going to be able to do this.
But if a locality represents only a historic location that has no physical
presence today, it is debatable if this is a “real and current” feature
that is appropriate for OSM rather than a historical map.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging