Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - natural=bare_rock
You also have edge cases, such as a solid rock surface, some of which has broken up into loose rock. ---Original Email--- Subject :Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - natural=bare_rock From :mailto:deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com Date :Sun Jan 30 23:20:25 America/Chicago 2011 2011/1/31 Johan Jönsson joha...@goteborg.cc: If used with the natural-key then it should at least be possible to use the same way as natural=wetland with subtags of wetland=.. natural=rockland :-) I started a new thread on that. Not all rocky surfaces are natural, just like sand being used on golf courses and beach volley ball courts, even if they are not within 100s of km of an actual beach... Another concern is that the tag is only supposed to be used for solid rock, I am not sure how people are supposed to know that. And what to use for loose rock. Real world examples off the top of my head. Ayres Rock/Uluru is supposed to be 1 big lump of sand stone. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Uluru_%28Helicopter_view%29-crop.jpg You also have the cores of what were volcanoes, the outer dirt layer has eroded away completely over time http://lh3.ggpht.com/_PBYeriHIc4k/SfT3VgN4yvI/A0A/GKwEHYMKEcI/P1010343.JPG Just to throw a spanner in the works, both of which are natural formations :) As for loose rock, isn't that scree? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all. -- Hypatia of Alexandria ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - natural=bare_rock
2011/1/31 j...@jfeldredge.com: You also have edge cases, such as a solid rock surface, some of which has broken up into loose rock. Yes, in natural mountaneous settings you will almost always have solid bare rock under the loose rock ;-) cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - natural=bare_rock
John Smith deltafoxtrot256@... writes: Not all rocky surfaces are natural, just like sand being used on golf courses and beach volley ball courts, even if they are not within 100s of km of an actual beach... That is true, instead of the proposal natural=bare_rock you can use landuse=quarry and other tags if it is not a natural rock surface you are tagging. As I concluded yesterday, this proposal would be better with landcover=bare_rock, then it could be used on every land cover consisting of a bare rock surface without confusion on the natural-key. /Johan Jönsson ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - natural=bare_rock
2011/1/31 Johan Jönsson joha...@goteborg.cc: John Smith deltafoxtrot256@... writes: Not all rocky surfaces are natural, just like sand being used on golf courses and beach volley ball courts, even if they are not within 100s of km of an actual beach... That is true, instead of the proposal natural=bare_rock you can use landuse=quarry and other tags if it is not a natural rock surface you are tagging. As I concluded yesterday, this proposal would be better with landcover=bare_rock, then it could be used on every land cover consisting of a bare rock surface without confusion on the natural-key. I think this whole natural discussion/criteria is not useful at all, because the rock itself is natural also in a quarry. natural in the sense of not-modified by humans is not a good criteria for tagging in general IMHO --- btw.: humans are also natural. cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
