[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Tag:shelter_type=rock_shelter

Jmapb jmapb at gmx.com
Sat Sep 5 01:37:04 UTC 2020


On 9/4/2020 6:24 PM, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote:
> Sep 4, 2020, 18:19 by tagging at openstreetmap.org:
>
>     node and discovered the shelter_type=rock_shelter subtag, but the
>     map in
>     question didn't render it any differently. Revisiting the site in fair
>     weather, I found a tiny crack under a ledge that *might* have kept a
>     child dry. It was very satisfying to delete that node.
>
> This seems to be a clear case of incorrect tagging of something that\
> has not actually existed.
>
> natural=rock_shelter and any other tagging of rock shelter would be
> equally
> incorrect

Assuming that I located the correct crack, it was undoubtedly a case of
overzealous tagging. The problem I see is that the definition of rock
shelter is subjective enough that this sort of tagging will happen from
time to time. Some mappers will stretch the definition because they just
love adding features. And since rock shelters are currently a subtag of
amenity=shelter, people looking for amenity=shelter -- with the possibly
live-saving properties that implies -- will be misled.

Tagging a rock shelter any other way -- natural=rock_shelter,
amenity=rock_shelter, whatever -- and we're no longer bound to
fulfilling the existing expectations of the parent tag.

Jason

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200904/bf3352e7/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list