[Tagging] RFC: Seaway key - proposal for mapping ports
pla16021 at gmail.com
Sat Mar 6 13:28:54 UTC 2021
On Sat, 6 Mar 2021 at 12:38, stevea <steveaOSM at softworkers.com> wrote:
> Routes were not even mentioned (by Martin) until I suggested that because
> we have them in train and road networks, they seemed they would find their
> way into sea networks, too,
Actually, routes were implicitly mentioned by Martin when he said he chose
the term "seaway" by analogy with "railway" and "highway." In fact, the
word "seaway" itself is used to denote routes, not termini. See
If the intention is to use seaway to map routes then it is probably
acceptable to also use it for termini (we use railway to map
railway stations, even though some of us might think that might not
have been the best way of doing it). If there is no intention to use seaway
to map routes then using it for termini is confusing, false to dictionary
definitions, false to common usage, and a bad choice of tag name.
It is an exceptionally bad choice of tag name if it will be used to map
facilities for which there are no associated routes (such as fishing ports
with no ferry or shipping services). This would be on a par with mapping
buildings as railway=* even if there is no associated railway line and never
has been a railway line anywhere near them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging