On 11/03/2015, Malcolm Herring <[email protected]> wrote: > OK, the mapper in question did not reply, but silently removed the tags. > This leaves me none the wiser as to the more widespread usage of this tag.
At least that's reassurance that a buoy, which can drift quite a bit on the surface, isn't considered as a survey point :p > Looking closer at the data, it appears that "man_made=survey_point" is > very often added to prominent objects, particularly towers, masts and > lighthouses. Could it be that some survey agencies use these objects as > triangulation points? Often yes. And to make that survey point "official" when it isn't a purpose-built structure, there is often a reference plaque placed on the structure at the exact location of the point. > If so, it raises a couple of issues: > > 1. The "man_made" key should refer to the structure, not its usage. > 2. The drift towards micro-mapping means that such objects, originally > mapped as nodes, get converted to plan outlines and the tags moved to > that closed way. If the intent of the "survey_point" mapper was to set a > lat/lon positional reference, then that scheme is undone. > > Might it not be appropriate to add a note in the Wiki page for this tag > that it should not be added it to existing objects, but to always create > a separate node? The wiki already mentions that the tag only applies to nodes, which should in theory catch "upgraded to an area" mishapps. There are currently 64 survey_point ways in the db (compared to 287000 nodes), so the problem exists but isn't too big. Care to review them ? That said, a "always add survey points as their own node" recommendation on the wiki can't hurt. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
