[Tagging] Draft proposal for Key:aerodrome
Andy Townsend
ajt1047 at gmail.com
Tue Sep 10 11:35:02 UTC 2019
On 10/09/2019 11:28, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
>> That seems like a bad idea because aerodrome:type is one of the ways
>> that mappers distinguish between military and non-military airfields.
> military=airfield + landuse=military is the standard way to do this.
I wasn't making any comment about what may or may not be the "standard"
way to do this; just saying that aerodrome:type is one of the ways that
mappers distinguish between military and non-military airfields.
Compare:
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/McF
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/McE
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/McG
You'll notice that in that area (and I'm sure elsewhere) that there are
edge cases - "military=airfield + landuse=military" won't exclude
Cambeltown, which has the old IATA code in OSM but isn't currently
landuse=military.
You didn't mention military at all in your initial email, which seems
like an omission.
Best Regards,
Andy
More information about the Tagging
mailing list