[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Survey Markers

[Paul Allen]

On Sat, 5 Jun 2021 at 07:27, Kyle Hensel via Tagging <
tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

Some of the suggestions:
>
>
>
> 1. survey_point:condition=destroyed
>
> 2. former:man_made=survey_point (or a similar lifecycle prefix)
>
>
>
> I think the first option is better since a 'destroyed' survey marker is
> still a valid survey point - Michael has explained this well in an earlier
> message:
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2021-June/061700.html
>

I'm not sure that survey points for which there are no visible traces are
mappable in OSM as such.  OSM is a map of visible objects (that's a
simplification, but close enough for this).  I can understand
why these positions are important to surveyors, but I don't think they meet
OSM criteria for mappability (I could be very wrong about that).

I can justify mapping some (not necessarily all) destroyed survey points
with a lifecycle prefix to prevent them being resurrected by armchair
mappers.
I can't justify mapping destroyed/invisible survey points just because they
were (and perhaps still are) used in surveys.  Surveyors have official
databases of these and don't need OSM to locate them.  If there really is
a need to integrate such a database with OSM there are tools like
uMap and Leaflet that would allow that to be done.

BTW, there are records of Ordnance Survey cut marks in buildings
where it is noted that the building itself has been destroyed.  No
matter how important that point was to past surveys, it is no longer
there and I don't see how it could be considered usable.  Historical
interest, perhaps, but we don't map history.

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210605/92b1f908/attachment.htm>