Re: [talk-au] Rock Overhangs

2019-04-15 Thread Mateusz Konieczny
Apr 15, 2019, 8:38 AM by andrew.harv...@gmail.com: > I'm okay with this, but I think we need to then define which situations would > have natural=rock_overhang without amenity=shelter, otherwise tag > proliferation would prevail. > Ones useless for shelter? For example, not deep enough to

Re: [talk-au] Rock Overhangs

2019-04-15 Thread Andrew Harvey
Some feedback on the global tagging list so far: "shelter is under the amenity key because it is shelter _for_ humans, it implies minimum dimensions (shelter for mice would have different requirements). It is one way to look on things and it is not the only way of course, you could add

Re: [talk-au] Rock Overhangs

2019-04-14 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
On Mon, 15 Apr 2019 at 07:55, David Wales wrote: > I support natural=rock_overhang, or something similar. > Yes, that seems the best answer. Thanks Graeme ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org

Re: [talk-au] Rock Overhangs

2019-04-14 Thread David Wales
I support natural=rock_overhang, or something similar. David On 14 April 2019 10:14:44 pm AEST, Andrew Harvey wrote: >Ok, thanks for the feedback. Let's gather some global thoughts on this, >I've posted >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-April/044554.html > >On Sun, 14

Re: [talk-au] Rock Overhangs

2019-04-14 Thread Andrew Harvey
Ok, thanks for the feedback. Let's gather some global thoughts on this, I've posted https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-April/044554.html On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 at 16:23, Roger Browne wrote: > I've never been happy about "natural=cave_entrance", yet I have used it > several

Re: [talk-au] Rock Overhangs

2019-04-14 Thread Roger Browne
I've never been happy about "natural=cave_entrance", yet I have used it several times because it seems to be the least bad of the tags currently in use. The use of "amenity' is just wrong, because an amenity is something that is provided for a purpose (such as a cafe, bicycle parking, a charging

Re: [talk-au] Rock Overhangs

2019-03-31 Thread David Wales
I tend to agree with Warin here. Unless some human has carved the cave out, I don't think it should count as an amenity! On 1/4/19 9:07 am, Warin wrote: > I object.  > amenity=shelter I see as a man made object, some with better shelter > than others. > I think these should remain in the 'natural

Re: [talk-au] Rock Overhangs

2019-03-31 Thread Warin
I object. amenity=shelter I see as a man made object, some with better shelter than others. I think these should remain in the 'natural key space, possibly natural=overhang? But then what do I know??? amenity=shelter has shelter_type

Re: [talk-au] Rock Overhangs

2019-03-31 Thread Andrew Harvey
> when (how deep) does a rock overhang / shelter become an actual cave? :-) Some judgement is needed, but the ones I've seen are pretty clear cut as being one or the other. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dshelter just says "A shelter

Re: [talk-au] Rock Overhangs

2019-03-31 Thread Graeme Fitzpatrick
On Sun, 31 Mar 2019 at 18:14, Andrew Harvey wrote: > Rock overhangs (rock shelters) have been quite extensively mistagged in > Australia as natural=cave_entrance. > > Are there any objections to re-tagging these overhangs tagged as > natural=cave_entrance to amenity=shelter +

[talk-au] Rock Overhangs

2019-03-31 Thread Andrew Harvey
Rock overhangs (rock shelters) have been quite extensively mistagged in Australia as natural=cave_entrance. Are there any objections to re-tagging these overhangs tagged as natural=cave_entrance to amenity=shelter + shelter_type=rock_shelter? Of course they would only be re-tagged where we have