[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Runway Holding Positions

Graeme Fitzpatrick graemefitz1 at gmail.com
Thu Mar 28 21:57:09 UTC 2019

On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 04:34, Mark Wagner <mark+osm at carnildo.com> wrote:

> How does this differ from aeroway=holding_position

On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 06:04, Steven Estes <tapestes at gmail.com> wrote:

> Tackle this a bit on the proposal page, which notes that holding_position
> as currently formulated has two limitations. First, it's  fairly broad.  It
> includes runway holding position markings, ILS critical holding position
> markings, and interim holding position markings.  Each of these markings is
> used in a different way, and if I were to pull OSM data into a flight
> simulation environment, the lack of distinction would be a huge problem.

How about modifying the existing tag to aeroway=holding_position:runway &
aeroway=holding_position:intermediate (or similar arrangement); or
alternatively aeroway:holding_position=runway / intermediate / anything

Second, it's defined as a node rather than a way, but to be useful, the
> full hold line (holding position marking) needs to annotated as it can't be
> assumed that the line is either straight or perpendicular to the taxiway
> centerline.  If the second issue were the only problem, I'd be inclined to
> just modify the existing tag to include ways (which appears to be used in
> 20% of all cases anyway).

& do just that - change the wording to only map it as a way, not a node. It
would appear, though, that they're currently not rendered (at least on the
main map - is there an aero map, similar to Open Sea Map?), & I would think
it fairly unlikely that they ever will be, so the distinction seem a bit


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190329/9980cf2e/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list