On 18/09/2013 18:15, Lukas Hornby wrote: > HI, > > Having studied all of the comments, we seem to agree that a tag is > needed, that it is worth tagging. However the ambiguity over plot (which > was the word I used in my proposal and lot (which has been read into > plot) seems to be a sticking point.
...or alternatively: it's clear a tag for an individual plot is needed, but after that point it got bikeshedded to death. I will try stating what is needed as clearly as I can: A plot is the individual parcel of land within and allotment site that is let (rented, hired, or other synonym) to one tenant. We already tag the whole site as landuse=allotments and we just need to mark individual plots with allotment[s]=plot(*). This makes it clear it's an allotment plot we're talking about, not anything else. Each plot will probably have a "number" (not necessarily a number) of some kind, and I'd suggest using ref=* for this. This appears to be about as complicated as it needs to get. I know this because not only do I *have* an allotment, I am the Warden of our allotment site and am responsible for administering the tenancies on that site, and that's all I need to map, barring a track or two. J. (*) Although natural spoken English would suggest tagging as allotment=plot, I can see how using allotments=plot makes it clear it's a sub-division of landuse=allotments, so I'd accept the plural form in the tag. But that's getting into Bikeshedding again. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging