[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