[OSM-talk] [RFC] tagging stones in the wild (erratic, balancing, boundary, stone age, artifact)

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Stanislav Brabec wrote:
> size=large (several tons), medium (can be moved by few people), small
> (can be moved by a single persons)

I would definitely not map anything that can easily be moved by a single 
person. (Or else put a sign next to it saying "Oh, if you move this 
would you please update OSM?") ,-)

I also advise against generic tag names ("type", "size", "count") whose 
exact meaning can only be derived from context ("natural=stone"). For a 
(hypothetical) example, "size=large" might mean something entirely 
different when applied to "amenity=post_pox"! While this is no killer 
argument because people and software will usually have the context 
available when processing data, to avoid confusion, I would use 
something like stone:size=large or stone_size=large or whatever.

Furthermore, try to avoid classification whereever possible. I can see 
that your "large/medium/small" is a sensible distinction but people can 
only use/understand that together with your definition (use "large" if 
...). If you would instead tag stone:circumference=20m or something, 
that would make it immediately clear how big the thing is, no need to 
look it up.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"