[OSM-talk] [tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC -(man_made=mineshaft)

Anthony osm at inbox.org
Wed Oct 21 01:52:53 BST 2009

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 8:26 PM, Tobias Knerr <osm at tobias-knerr.de> wrote:
> Because tags like disused=yes conflict with a general principle in OSM:
> We don't have a fixed set of tags and mappers can invent and use their
> own tags, so it should be possible for software to ignore tags it
> doesn't know without causing problems. If I don't support distinguishing
> between different variants of amenity=parking, I just ignore parking=*
> tags entirely, and while the result is less useful, it's still correct.
> If I don't support disused features, I can just ignore disused=yes tags
> ... no wait, I can't.

Okay, but what if the tag is "man_made=mineshaft"?  Is it safe to
ignore the "disused=yes" tag then?  I don't see why not.  It's not
like "man_made=mineshaft" means you can grab a pickaxe and go head for
it.  A mineshaft defaults to *not* being accessible to the public.
Whereas a parking lot defaults to being *accessible* to the public (in
fact, that's even in the definition, though the definition is somewhat
ruined with the weasel-word "Generally").

Bottom line, is "man_made=mineshaft" a tag to represent the physical
presence of a mineshaft, or is it a tag to represent the use of a
mineshaft in mining?  If the former, disused=yes is fine.  If the
latter, it isn't.

More information about the talk mailing list