[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (man_made=guard_stone)

[Stefan Tauner]

On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 12:24:00 +0100
Stefan Tauner <stefan.tauner at gmx.at> wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 08:53:20 +0000
> Jez Nicholson <jez.nicholson at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Then my question to Volker would be: rows of trees are common, and involve
> > lots of trees. Is it entirely necessary to have the same thing for guard
> > stones or if people are so keen to map them could they not just plot the
> > individual stones?  
> 
> This seems sensible to me since these will not be spread out in the
> middle of a field but can easily be added as nodes to existing ways of
> the buildings if they are not too numerous. So my question is
> (basically the same :) Are there many examples where this would be too
> cumbersome (e.g, a long stretch of street that has one every few
> meters)?
> 

I take all of that completely back. The example mentioned earlier[1]
(which I have overlooked so far) with the explanation of being
historically used to give horses a break on long ascents changed my
mind completely. There should be a linear tagging scheme included in
the proposal. I have changed my vote to no.

I'd prefer barrier=guard_stone to be used for both - one-dimensional and
linear features (unlike tree_row which I think has more disadvantages
than advantages), but I could very well live with man_made and also the
_row if there is a majority in favor. IMHO they are clearly a barrier
in most cases since they enforce or help enforcing vehicles of reaching
some location - in the case of the ones on ascents they are even a
safety device (which is basically what barriers are all about:
enforcing access restrictions to ensure the safety of property and
living beings).

1: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=46.54579916666668&lng=8.567887499999983&z=17&focus=photo&pKey=Obq2gPh-ViSMGU6EOZ2SgQ&x=0.3434174930073238&y=0.6631131863058412&zoom=0

-- 
Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner