[Tagging] surface=block_paved, or surface=paved + paving=block
fernando.trebien at gmail.com
Thu Jan 9 00:14:00 UTC 2020
>From the key:surface article:
- surface=paved: "This value gives only a rough description; use a
more precise value if possible."
- surface=paving_stones: "A relatively smooth surface paved with
artificial blocks (block pavers, bricks) or natural stones
(flagstones), with a flat top. The gaps between individual paving
stones are very narrow, either because the stones have a perfectly
regular shape (rectangular, or any surface-filling shape) or because
they have been carefully selected, fitted and placed in order to form
an even, closed surface."
The picture  fits the description for surface=paving_stones, and
I've been told that the description fits current mapping practices.
 So the question is whether the mapping terminology fits the common
language and whether this would be a good reason to change the tagging
scheme. Language is a problem for other values as well, such as
surface=cobblestone. Since surface=* is, in principle, an open set, it
may be interesting asking if it is worth distinguishing the three
subtypes (block pavers, bricks, and flagstones) for data consumers
(routing, rendering, etc.). I don't see when the distinction would be
really important, and in fact many of the values in current use are
not yet supported by the oldest data consumers.
There seems to be almost no usage of paving=*,  I'm not sure this
would be ideal.
On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 7:37 PM Mateusz Konieczny
<matkoniecz at tutanota.com> wrote:
> Is following picture
> depicting construction of surface=paving_stones?
> Or is it incorrect to tag in this way and
> surface=block_paved, or surface=paved + paving=block
> should be considered as preferable?
> Posted to look for more feedback in
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Tagging