2011/10/14 John Sturdy <[email protected]>: > I don't think the word "location" is very good, but then it wouldn't > be the only tag key in use that seems a bit clumsy; I guess tagging is > just far enough away from normal use of natural language words that > we'll have to put up with that.
+1 > (I would have chosen the word "level" > for this use, and that is not documented as being used, but is it > worth trying to change to use it?) well level is documented in the wiki since 2009 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:level and has already 18000 occurances in the db http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/level#values > I think it makes sense to have one tag that indicates that something > is underground, for any type of thing. That means that software (e.g. > renderers) can do a simple test for it, and that mappers only need to > know one tag for it. And I prefer "location=underground" over > "underground=yes" because we could also use "location=overground", and > thus still only have to do one check in software to know that > something's not at ground level. what does "underground" exactly mean? What is the definition for "ground"-level in the case of a highly modified urban context? Is "earth/soil" required, or can ground also be completely artificial? cheers, Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
