[Tagging] How to put a name tag on an area with more than one type?

Joseph Eisenberg joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Sun Dec 13 17:54:22 UTC 2020


1) To tag a named "Torp" it sounds like there are several different correct
options, depending on what currently exists at the location.

If there is a single family home or a couple of homes used as residences,
it would be a place=isolated_dwelling mapped as a node at the centre.

If it is still used as a farm, then place=farm can be used on a node
instead. This is treated as similar to place=isolated_dwelling by many data
users. It is also possible to map the area of the farmyard (around the
buildings) as landuse=farmyard and add the name to this feature, if the
name is only for the actual farm buildings and not for all the surrounding
areas.

For a named settlement with more than 2 families (but smaller than a
village), place=hamlet on a node would be appropriate. I'm not sure if a
torp is every that large?

If the torp is no longer inhabited, you can use a lifecycle tag to show
this: e.g. abandoned:place=farm or abandoned:place=isolated_dwelling or
abandoned:place=hamlet show that a former farm or small settlement are now
abandoned and no longer inhabited.

2) For a mountain:
Most mountains share a name with their highest peak, so natural=peak is a
great way to tag these.

But it's true that some "mountain" names are not the name of a peak. In
this case there are a couple other tags in use: natural=ridge is used with
a linear way which is drawn along the ridgeline. This works for many named
single ridges. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dridge -
example here: https://www.opentopomap.org/#map=15/41.76382/-123.18038 -
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/631166206/#map=13/41.7664/-123.1567&layers=C

Sometimes a named "mountain" is not a single ridge but a whole range of
connected ridges. In this case we usually call it a "mountain range" in
English, and there is a somewhat uncommon tag for this
natural=mountain_range which I've used to map some ranges in my area. This
tag is harder to use. In some cases the best option is to use it on a node
at the center of the mountain range, in others it is possible to use it on
a linear way along the highest line of ridges at the center of the mountain
range. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Anatural%3Dmountain_range -
example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/686647385#map=12/42.0515/-122.7575&layers=C

While we can all disagree on how far down into the valley the mountain
extends, everyone agrees that the highest peak is part of the mountain, so
mapping peaks of a mountain as a node is 100% verifiably to be correct. In
some cases a linear way is also verifiable for a ridge or a linear mountain
range.

-- Joseph Eisenberg


On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 7:04 AM Ture Pålsson via Tagging <
tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

>
> 13 dec. 2020 kl. 15:21 skrev Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com>:
>
>  I'm probably misunderstanding this, but torp doesn't seem to be a type of
> building.  The tag building=torp says that this building IS a torp (as
> opposed to a house, or a shop, or a garage, or a shed, or a barn).
> If you feel a need to indicate that a building was once part of a torp,
> building=torp isn't the way to do it.
>
>
> You’re right; I was extremely sloppy with terminology there. A torp is (or
> rather was) a small farm, usually either part of a bigger farm and farmed
> by a tenant, paying rent to the bigger farm in the form of work, or farmed
> by a soldier (paying rent by, well, being a soldier). Today, most of them
> are either completely gone or used as summer houses, very probably not with
> the original building.
>
> I suppose what I wanted to say was:
>
> * place=locality is used about all sorts of things, both inhabited and
> uninhabited, and is pretty much useless.
>
> * There are many places around Sweden (and probably the rest of the world
> as well!) where there is just forest (or fields) today, that have a name
> because they were, at some time, a torp (or some other kind of settlement).
> To render these in ”swedish topo-map style” (i.e, italics), some sort of
> tagging is needed to say ”this place has a name because it used to be a
> farm/torp/whatever, but today there is nothing here”. (I suppose some would
> argue that these should not be in OSM at all, because they are very hard to
> verify on the ground).
>
> * There are also isolated dwellings, hamlets, villages, suburbs and
> airport car parks (comparing old and present-day maps around
> Stockholm-Arlanda airport is quite fun) whose names refer to long-gone
> torps, but those can be tagged according to their present-day usage.
>
> And I’d like to apologize to Anders for derailing this thread by bringing
> up the subject at all! It was intended as an illustration of the
> uselessness of locality, but I got a bit carried away. Trying to render
> consistent maps from inconsistent OSM data does that to you. =)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201213/fb7950b4/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list