graemefitz1 at gmail.com
Thu Nov 28 23:21:17 UTC 2019
On Thu, 28 Nov 2019 at 20:47, Volker Schmidt <voschix at gmail.com> wrote:
> - First of all when I see a both-sided sloped linear elevation I do
> not know I see a berm.because it is a rarely used term
> Can you see a pile of dirt? If so, it's a berm. If it's a bricks, blocks,
rocks, concrete, wooden, steel or any other type of construction, it's not!
I agree it's not very common in normal usage, but would be quite common in
any engineering context, & there are any number of OSM terms which are very
> - Second it is ill-defined from the shape point of view: it can define
> a step in an earth wall and it can mean an earth wall with sloped sides
> Yep, either one could be a berm.
> - Fourth it can describe man-made or natural objects.
> I saw reference to berm also being used to describe a line of debris
thrown up on a beach by a storm, however, that wouldn't be a permanent
feature, as it would be changed by the next storm, or human use of the
beach, so we wouldn't map it.
Let's go back and define what we need
Agree with everything you say here
> - (this tag is purpose-free)
> Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "purpose-free"?
Thinking about it we may only need to add a new man_made=slope_base tag.
> Packaging this together with the opposite man_made=embankment in a "slope"
> relation, this would give us the possibility to model even complex objects.
> Without a relation a closed man-made=slope_base way could be used to draw
> the footprint of levees/dykes. The use could be similar to water=riverbank.
I did suggest area=slope or similar, to map the area of levee walls in
discussion about large flood control levees a couple of weeks ago, but it
didn't seem to go down very well?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging