[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - survey_point:benchmark
61sundowner at gmail.com
Wed Mar 11 01:00:03 UTC 2020
On 8/3/20 11:38 pm, Anne-Karoline Distel wrote:
> I've been surveying benchmarks for the past four months and I would like
> to propose an alternative to benchmark=yes for survey points:
> The reason being that I would like to also propose
> survey_point:hexagonal_bolt and survey_point:ground_bolt with it.
> Definition: Ordnance survey point usually chiselled in stone with its
> typical horizontal bar and arrow below on vertical surfaces, dot with
> arrow below on horizontal surfaces. Now often replaced by hexagonal
> bolts in walls or bolts in the ground.
While they maybe 'ordnance survey points' where you are, it the rest of
the world it would be more incisive to drop "ordnance" leaving 'survey
Err "usually chiselled in stone with its typical horizontal bar and
arrow below on vertical surfaces, dot with arrow below on horizontal
I think that may be the usually case there.. what about elsewhere? Try
to use the local things as examples rather than a strict definition?
It looks like the fundamental thing about them is the precise height of
the point. I think that is the thing that needs to be stated in the
Thank you, it will be nice to have some organization on survey_point=* !
I assume that the purpose of the survey point is what is trying to be
Others may have used survey_point=* for the physical structure or
Perhaps a more specific key to get away from the mess?
More information about the Tagging