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

Lesi lesi at lesi.is-a-geek.net
Wed Oct 28 00:00:25 GMT 2009

> how do you define "main area"?
> Aren't the shafts vertical access / ventilation shafts that
> lead to the inner mine? IMHO that defines them as
> part of the mine (and indicates that they should be comprised).

The main area is the area where all the bigger buildings of the mine are. An 
airshaft could be a single node outside of this area and that's why a 
polygon can not express that the mineshaft is part of the mine.
But perhaps you meant something different with polygon.

> or the company provides you the information,
> or you work there. That's anyway not a problem to discuss:
> either you have the info and put it or you don't and will
> most likely not put it.

You almost always know the name of the mine. But it is too complicated to 
create a relation for the mineshaft, to assosiate it with that mine - 
escpecially when only the mineshaft is mapped.

> sure, just put name=<name_of_the_mine> like for
> any other feature. A problem might arise if the
> mineshaft has a name itself and/or if there is more
> than one mineshaft. In these cases I'd still opt for the relation.

All mineshafts i know have their own name. That's why you cannot use the 
name-tag for the name of the mine.

So at the moment there are:
name -> name of the mineshaft itself
mine -> name of the mine which the mineshaft is part of
operator -> name of the operator of the mine


More information about the talk mailing list