2014-08-14 12:31 GMT+02:00 Martin Vonwald <[email protected]>: > 2014-08-14 12:25 GMT+02:00 André Pirard <[email protected]>: > >> On 2014-08-14 11:08, Janko Mihelić wrote : >> >> Well first, tunnel=yes is obviously wrong. We need to replace this with >> cave=yes. Other than that, I have no problems with this. If a cave has two >> cave entrances, then information that they are connected by footpaths is >> valuable information. >> >> Obviously? Regarding paths and waterways, especially ones fitted up for >> tourism, I wonder... >> > > Maybe not completely obvious, but I would agree with Janko. In my opinion, > a "tunnel" is man-made, while a "cave" is not. >
Neither OSM wiki nor Wikipedia restricts it this way. There is even section about natural tunnels - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel#Natural_tunnels (though caves are not mentioned there). Note, I am not a native speaker - maybe it sound terrible, worse than for example using highway as tag also for private roads. But I see absolutely no benefit from a completely separate tagging (that nobody would support).
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
