Re: [Tagging] Tagging remain of extinct volcanoes

[Joseph Eisenberg]

A natural=volcano is suppose to be a volcanic vent, usually found at the
center of a crater.

While it’s common to misuse this tag to mark the highest peak of a mountain
of volcanic origin, it would be best to use it for the actual center of the
volcanic vent, and use natural=peak for the high point.

Some recently extinct volcanoes might have a visible crater wall or an open
vent, is they are low elevation or latitude in areas without glaciers or
heavy rainfall (extinct craters usually erode quickly). But it would be
most verifiable if only volcanic vents with clear signs of recent activity
are tagged.

An eroded remnant of a volcano in Germany which hardly looks like a crater
should not be tagged natural=volcano, since the classification as a volcano
is based on fieldwork by professional geologists and can’t be confirmed by
regular mappers.

Extinct volcanoes might get a tag that could be attached to a natural=peak
node; e.g.natural=peak +
volcano:status=extinct

Joseph

On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 11:19 PM Mateusz Konieczny 
wrote:

> Is it OK to use natural=volcano for remains of volcanoes?
>
> There is volcano:status=extinct but I feel that tagging
> volcano-related rocks as volcanoes is a poor idea.
>
> See
>
> https://www.steinmann.uni-bonn.de/institut/bereiche/endogene-prozesse/arbeitsgruppen/strukturgeologie/lehre/aufschluesse-im-rheinland/dachsbusch
> for a real example (text in German, but images should be clear).
>
> Triggered by
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1792260#map=18/50.42869/7.23260
>
> Similar examples include
> Góra Swiętej Anny / Annaberg
> https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B3ra_%C5%9Awi%C4%99tej_Anny -
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2241712057/history
> volcano existed here 27 millions years ago, volcanic cone is fully eroded
> and
> the current hill is made of stones formed in the caldera of the volcano.
>
>
> Wdżar
> https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wd%C5%BCar
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/726504503/history
> There are volcanic rocks here, mountains looks like a volcanonic cone,
> called
> volcano by some for marketing purposes but there is no reason whatsoever to
> describe it as volcano.
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] [Indoor] is indoor=level walled ?

[PanierAvide]

Hello,

Thanks for your answer. The use case I have in mind is a parking 
building, where ground floor hasn't really any wall around it. As I use 
indoor=level to add information about the floor (name in particular), I 
was asking this to make sure this indoor=level object doesn't create any 
implicit wall. If so, I can model rest of this floor using 
indoor=area/room without having a wall closing the whole level.


I also use level=* as defined in Simple Indoor Tagging, and I'm aware of 
level:ref=*. But level:ref=* is made for saying "this feature belongs 
the level named XYZ", which is another use case.


Best regards,

Adrien P.

Le 24/07/2019 à 03:18, Warin a écrit :
I'd use indoor=room for an area that is enclosed by a wall, after all 
that is a room.


indoor=wall to me is a free standing barrier within a room.

A pillar? Humm you could model it as a wall.

If the building has multiple levels then using the level=* tag says 
what level the thing is on. A wall could be only on one level, or a 
few .. I'd want to tag that . A pillar could flow from bottom level to 
top level.


I don't use indoor=level, I do use level=* and level:ref=*.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_Indoor_Tagging

And I'd look at  some tagging examples on level up
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_Indoor_Tagging#Tagging_Examples_.28alphabetical.29 



___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging