[Tagging] Non-historic static aircraft

[Mateusz Konieczny]

Dec 27, 2020, 00:35 by pla16021 at gmail.com:

> On Sat, 26 Dec 2020 at 23:24, Graeme Fitzpatrick <> graemefitz1 at gmail.com> > wrote:
>
>
>> In that case, would it need RFC & so on, or just create a page?
>>
>
> We don't seem to have a formalized process for what to do when we
> encounter a tag that is in use, sensible, and appropriate, but
> undocumented.
>
I usually just create a wiki page.

See
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dshuffleboard
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:hgv%3Ddiscouraged
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:old_addr:housenumber
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:entrance%3Dgarage
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed:hgv:forward
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn:bus:lanes
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:house
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dfactory
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dmonastery
for some of pages that I created to record outcome of my
research or because someone was looking for documentation
and there was nothing directly linkable.


>>
>> Certainly not going to try to map everything in The Boneyard! 
>>  
>>
>> Would it work to map the area as man_made=aircraft?
>>
>
> Nope.  That would make a big aircraft.  Bigger than Spruce Goose.
>
+1It is not a single aircraft.

> languse=depot + depot=aircraft + depot:type=storage.
>
I would use landuse=military with tagging along 
militray=depot + depot=aircraft
landuse=depot has some problems

This tag is frequently used to everything that can be called depot
including tram depots, warehouses, container depots, bus depots,
areas for storage of produced vehicles and similar.


Such mix of features in one tag is not really useful.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201227/73346a39/attachment.htm>