[talk-au] Tagging silos?

[stevea]

I'm not saying it should, but it could:  somebody sees both usefulness to specify and usefulness to tag (heavily implying serious usefulness to "seeing the bigger picture of data" after they are entered and become geospatial) and makes a proposal that craftily "gathers" silos together into one of many flavors (what are we at, 19 different types?) of OSM's relations.  (A relation's type=* key).  I might imagine type=collection could be a good start, then those sort themselves into various agricultural "divisions" or so...and then somebody starts a thread on the tagging mail-list about "silo groups" (I'm simply making that up in a fantasy) and people begin to back-channel a proposal, which gets traffic on its Talk (Discussion) page and might get voted on and Approved... and used in the real world / real map as "sane, well specified, harmonious, agreed upon with a certain amount of consensus..." and so on.

How very OSM that would be.

At this point in time, I'll say "rather nice as entered" (as a little cluster of silos) and whoever wants to dream of mapping silos in some fancy fashion certainly could.  And might someday.  Bean Growers Australia, I wave from California!

Such a wonderful plastic map...uh, I mean database, we have here.

> On Aug 10, 2022, at 6:51 PM, Phil Wyatt <phil at wyatt-family.com> wrote:
> 
> They look fine – I have also done one set as ways which is the other alternative
>  
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=20/-26.55069/151.83033
>  
> Cheers - Phil
>  
> From: Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefitz1 at gmail.com> 
> Sent: Thursday, 11 August 2022 11:08 AM
> To: Ewen Hill <ewen.hill at gmail.com>
> Cc: OSM-Au <talk-au at openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [talk-au] Tagging silos?
>  
> Tried the first group of them: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-26.55053/151.83027
>  
> Still not convinced that individual is the way to go?
>  
> Thanks
>  
> Graeme
>