I think you had better make the requirements for tower less strict. Most of what I consider radio towers have no accommodation in them. It's the shape and structure of the tower that makes the difference.
Here is the wiki page concerning towers: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power%3Dtower Take for example certain radio towers and the power towers shown above. Both of these have wide bases with legs for support and are therefore free standing. A mast, OTOH, is usually a single tube or lattice structure, whose height is much greater than its width and whose base is often a single point. These can be either guyed or free standing. Radio and power towers are not usually guyed because their legs offer sufficient support. IMO I don't think any changes in definition are needed. Cheers, Dave On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Malcolm Herring < [email protected]> wrote: > This is a continuation of a discussion started in the devel list. The > issue is the definitions of "tower" and "mast". > > The two terms are used interchangeably in both UK & US english, resulting > in a lack of consensus for tagging. > > Perhaps we should define a "for use in OSM tagging" definitions of these > terms, simply to fix a convention. I will try a proposal: > > Tower: Any free-standing structure of high vertical aspect ratio that has > some kind of accommodation within it (observation decks, restaurants, > offices, apartments, etc) > > Mast: Any structure of high vertical aspect ratio that has no > accommodation (apart from service access), commonly used for communications > purposes & may or may not be free-standing. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > -- Dave Swarthout Homer, Alaska Chiang Mai, Thailand Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
