[OSM-talk] classification of airports/aerodromes

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Wed Apr 13 00:29:38 UTC 2016

On 13/04/2016 8:35 AM, Alejandro S. wrote:
> But the surface tag applies to runaways, not aerodromes, does it?
If the surface tag is on the runway .. then it applies to the runway, 
similarly for taxiway etc.

Personally my experience is that it much easier to map the runway, as 
that is fairly well defined.
The area of the aerodrome is harder - the boundary maybe fenced making 
it a little easier.
Most unpaved runways have no easy way to determine the extent of the 
'aerodrome' so it does not usually get mapped.
I don't usually put a surface tag on an aerodrome, but I have tagged 
surfaces on runways,
one of which was grass and has changed to paved in my term of mapping 
history, the 'taxiways' remain grass .. and unmapped.

> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016, 23:25 Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com 
> <mailto:61sundowner at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     On 13/04/2016 5:47 AM, Michael Kugelmann wrote:
>     > Am 12.04.2016 um 11:40 schrieb Christoph Hormann:
>     >> This is also a problem for map rendering - map styles use these
>     features
>     >> to place labels and icons but these features are generally too
>     >> ill-defined and undifferentiated to do this properly.
>     > I agree completely. This is something that should be improved:
>     we need
>     > at least some rough categories for aerodromes. Because it does not
>     > make sense to me at all to render a grass strip exactly the same
>     as a
>     > big international airport.
>     surface=grass
>     OR
>     surface=paved
>     Some airports are locally categorised as 'domestic',
>     'international' ...
>     I lack expertise in this area but the public are aware of these two
>     categories.
>     > This is open since years but nobody really took care about this
>     Rendering ... rather than a tagging problem.
>     > Of cause this will not be easy as the regulations are different
>     in the
>     > different countries. But we should find some categorization. And any
>     > approach is better than the current situation.
>     The surface tag is has been assumed by some mappers. Perhaps that
>     needs
>     to addresses on the wiki?
>     _______________________________________________
>     talk mailing list
>     talk at openstreetmap.org <mailto:talk at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20160413/b4355c3f/attachment.html>

More information about the talk mailing list