[Tagging] urban fossils

[joost schouppe]

Hi,

Thanks for the comments! Any documentation about this tag should indeed
explain that only notable features should be added. But compare to mapping
individual trees. No reasonable person would suggest mapping ALL th trees
in OSM, but that's not a reason not to map SOME of the trees.

The book I saw about the topic does the same - it doesn't intend to collect
all visible fossils, but rather examplary or rare specimens.

Op di 30 mrt. 2021 21:57 schreef Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com>:

> On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 20:37, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
> tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> It could be also used on such cases, but in some places you would have
>> an absurd amount of such objects.
>>
>
> Parts of North Derbyshire have a lot of limestone that gets dressed and
> used in buildings.  It is full of fossils, mostly crinoid stems and some
> ammonites (as well as other things).
>
> If the tag gets extended to rural use (as it probably would) there
> are lots of dry walls made of limestone around fields.  It would be
> unusual to spot a rock in one of those walls that doesn't have at
> least one visible fossil.
>
> Unless there is some sort of size/visibility limit, this would be like
> creating a tag for individual bricks.
>
> --
> Paul
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210331/819b205a/attachment.htm>