Maybe not clear but I was talking about the non-natural ones. Kevin
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Barnett, Phillip <phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk > wrote: > An erratic boulder is certainly natural by definition, as may be a > balancing boulder, or other conspicuous outcrop. > > > > > ** > *PHILLIP BARNETT > **SERVER MANAGER > * > 200 GRAY'S INN ROAD > LONDON > WC1X 8XZ > UNITED KINGDOM > T +44 (0)20 7430 4474 > F > E phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk > WWW.ITN.CO.UK > P Please consider the environment. Do you really need to print this > email? > ------------------------------ > > *From:* talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org [mailto: > talk-boun...@openstreetmap.org] *On Behalf Of *Kevin Peat > *Sent:* 23 May 2009 15:44 > *To:* Stanislav Brabec > *Cc:* talk@openstreetmap.org > *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk] [RFC] tagging stones in the wild (erratic, > balancing, boundary, stone age, artifact) > > > > Hi Stanislav, > > I agree there is something missing in this area as I've added some things > on Dartmoor (which has a vast amount of this stuff) and couldn't find many > helpful tags already in use. > > I'm not too keen on natural=stone as surely the significant thing about > these artifacts is they are not natural. Either historic or man_made would > seem better. > > I didn't spend too much time thinking about it but so far I've used: > > historic=stone_row > historic=stone_circle > historic=standing_stone > > I didn't use menhir for standing stone as I didn't a lot of people would > know what it means. > > regards, > Kevin > > > > > On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Stanislav Brabec <u...@penguin.cz> > wrote: > > It seems that mapping features lack stones. In a flat country, any > bigger stone has its local name and it is an important orientation > point. But OSM now lacks any classification and rendering of stones. If > you look at Stonehenge, you see just two points in the mapnik map. > > Some of stones use tourism=attraction, some use natural=stone > (unofficial), some of them use historic=monument or historic=memorial, > some use amenity=place_of_worship,religion=stone_age_druidic > or tourism=artwork. > > Let's try to classify it. Note that sometimes it is not possible to > decide the history of the stone and assign correct tag and we have to > consider it as a generic stone. > > I would like to propose a new tag for point (a stone), way (a line of > stones), and area (area with stones) > > > Generic stone > ============= > Just a stone in the wild without any known story. > > natural=stone (German wiki already documents this tag) > optional: > size=large (several tons), medium (can be moved by few people), small > (can be moved by a single persons) > count=number of stones (maybe size=large,medium count=1,5 could mean > 1 large and 5 medium stones) > > > Balancing boulder (wobble stone) > ================================ > > A stone in an unstable position. A small power allows the stone to be > wobbled. Some of them are natural, some of them are human made or human > moved. > > Mark as generic stone plus: > type=balancing (or type=wobble, comment from any native English?) > > > Erratic boulder > =============== > > A boulder moved by a ice code during the ice age. It has a significantly > different composition than stones in the nature around. > > Mark as generic stone plus: > type=erratic > > > Boundary stone > ============== > > Single, several or many boulders moved by a human to mark boundary of a > ground, or just moved away from a cultivated area. Most of them has just > a natural shape, but some of them may have some carving. > > Natural stone mark as generic stone plus: > type=boundary > > Stone with carving: I am unsure (artifact or still a natural stone) > > > Stone age artifacts > =================== > > I am not sure, whether these stones should use natural=stone (they > consists from a natural stone and something it's impossible to > discriminate) or historic=... or even place_of_worship (the religion is > very unsure for most of them, and even religious purpose is not sure) > > Here a list of probably most common types. > > type= > menhir: vertically placed stone (most of them are lone stone, but some > of them consist from more stones) > > dolmen: a set o stones with a flat stone roof > > human_made_area: area with stones following certain idea > > human_made_array: array of stones - area consisting of a stone line > > stone_image: stone image consisting of hundreds or thousands small > stones > > > Other artifacts > =============== > > Stones placed in memory of something may be historic=memorial, > sculptures may be tourism=artwork... I am not sure. > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > Stanislav Brabec > http://www.penguin.cz/~utx <http://www.penguin.cz/%7Eutx> > > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > > > > Please Note: > > > > Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily > represent > those of Independent Television News Limited unless specifically stated. > This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely for > the use of the individual > or entity to which they are addressed. > If you have received this email in error, please notify postmas...@itn.co.uk > > Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of > our clients and business, > we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our systems. > > Thank You. > > >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
