[Tagging] disguised communication towers

Greg Troxel gdt at lexort.com
Sat Nov 16 02:11:20 UTC 2019


Eric Theise <erictheise at gmail.com> writes:

> From my morning reading it seems that entities tagged with
>
>   tower:type=communication
>   tower:construction=concealed
>
> and either man_made=mast or man_made=tower should cough up cellphone towers
> masquerading as cacti, palms, pines, flagpoles, and such. But apart from a
> note="pine tree" that jumped out at me I'm not finding much. I have to
> assume I'm barking up the wrong tree (sorry).

Around me, most cell towers (as we call them) are not disguised.  A few
are, and they look like fake pine trees, and are usually really
obviously fake.  People, including me, who add cell towers very likely
have no idea that anybody carees that they have fake branches on them,
and don't consider this all that interesting and don't bother to tag it.
The presence of fake branches simply means "the local Planning Board or
Zoning Board of Appeals required fake branches, and the cell company
decided that paying for fake branches was cheaper than arguing about
it".

So for your strategy, I would say

  1) convince mappers that this is important.   (Perhaps argue that it's
  more important than the vertical_smoothness tag for peopel who ride
  bicycles vertically on the tower -- and yes that's a bad joke.)

  2) wait for a long time for others to adjust the tags, maybe 5 years

  3) use the tagging scheme as you would like it to be
  



More information about the Tagging mailing list