[OSM-talk] NT mapping?

[Mike Collinson]

At 06:51 AM 18/02/2007, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>Phillip Barnett wrote:
>
>>Does anyone think it worthwhile to invent a tag for National Trust 
>>properties, or is that too UK oriented? It's nice to be able to see 
>>where NT properties are - Ordnance Survey maps use the Oakleaf 
>>symbol to indicate.
>
>Not a bad idea, but I'd suggest you invent a value, not a tag - 
>something like property_owner (that's not a properly-thought-out 
>suggestion, I'll let the tag mafiosi work out the best one). That 
>way, you could have property_owner=National Trust, or 
>property_owner=English Heritage, or property_owner=Cadw, and get all 
>the meaning without overly cluttering the tag space.
>
>cheers
>Richard

That is not a bad idea.  To broaden the issue slightly, what would 
either of you use as the base tag?  I've been following an "If in 
doubt, use tourism=attraction" policy and then putting historic= tags 
if possible and appropriate.  That way I can capture anything from 
bat caves to historic lighthouses in a consistent fashion.  Using in 
conjunction with a property_owner= tag means we could then also 
identify chains of things like disney theme parks (or may be not as 
you wish :-) ).

And while we are discussing the subject,  how are folks tagging 
preserved buildings that are open to the public (large stately homes, 
small preserved buildings in a town, lighthouses, ...)? The current 
set of historic= values does not seem extensive enough. I thought I 
saw a thread on this earlier.


Mike
Manila 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20070218/63e2e9bf/attachment.html>