On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 09:49:07 -0400 "Mark Bradley" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Message: 1 > > Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2017 12:14:11 +0100 > > From: Philip Barnes <[email protected]> > > To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" > > <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [Tagging] Power Tower Landuse = ? > > > > > > > > On 4 July 2017 11:07:04 BST, Martin Koppenhoefer > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >2017-07-04 1:56 GMT+02:00 John Willis <[email protected]>: > > > > > >> it seems like other long-term infrastructure (power towers, > > >communication > > >> towers) are suggested to be landuse=industrial. > > >> > > >> I really think there should be some kind of subtag then, because > > >> not > > >only > > >> can you define what and why you are tagging, but it allows > > >> presets to > > >be > > >> easily created in iD and searched by new taggers. > > >> > > >> industrial=power, industrial=communication, etc. > > >> > > > > > > > > >I agree that a formalization of industrial subtags would be really > > >desirable. There are many different kind of things that get this > > >same landuse property, e.g. warehouses, production facilities, > > >logistical infrastructure (ports, distribution centres, ...). > > > > > >For the German context (but likely also for other places), there > > >should be also a distinction for "light industry" (Gewerbe). > > > > > >Then it seems strange we don't have yet a standardized list of > > >typical top level categories (e.g. automotive, textile, > > >semiconductors, electronics, energy, machinery, mining, ...) > > > > > The correct English term is pylon. > > > > Although I am a little confused by the purpose of this thread, the > > presence of pylons does not in my experience change the landuse, if > > they cross farmland the land beneath them is still farmland or in > > the case of this photo natural=wood. > > > > https://flic.kr/p/V8pLyS > > > > Phil (trigpoint) > > > > In American English most people would call the structure a tower, but > according to the convention of OSM using British English, I would > defer to the word "pylon." > > I agree with you Phil; I don't think the small area under a pylon > should have its own landuse. I don't think most people think in > terms of such a small area when they hear the term "landuse." I > think that giving a pylon area a separate landuse is overkill and > misleading. Just wondering: how would you tag something like this? https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9591891,-118.9945941,334m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e4 It's a paved and fenced area measuring about 30 meters by 250 meters, containing two heavily-braced pylons where a major powerline goes over the crest of a hill. Or this one, four tightly-spaced pylons carrying lines from Bonneville Dam to the substation across the river: https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6430068,-121.9514778,174m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e4 Some of these "small areas" are fairly substantial. Yes, *most* pylons don't need a separate landuse mapping, but some do. -- Mark _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
