Sorry, it was supposed to be "using highway as key also for private roads".
2014-08-14 12:40 GMT+02:00 Mateusz Konieczny <matkoni...@gmail.com>: > > > > 2014-08-14 12:31 GMT+02:00 Martin Vonwald <imagic....@gmail.com>: > > 2014-08-14 12:25 GMT+02:00 André Pirard <a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com>: >> >>> On 2014-08-14 11:08, Janko Mihelić wrote : >>> >>> Well first, tunnel=yes is obviously wrong. We need to replace this >>> with cave=yes. Other than that, I have no problems with this. If a cave has >>> two cave entrances, then information that they are connected by footpaths >>> is valuable information. >>> >>> Obviously? Regarding paths and waterways, especially ones fitted up for >>> tourism, I wonder... >>> >> >> Maybe not completely obvious, but I would agree with Janko. In my >> opinion, a "tunnel" is man-made, while a "cave" is not. >> > > Neither OSM wiki nor Wikipedia restricts it this way. There is even > section about natural tunnels - see > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel#Natural_tunnels (though caves are > not mentioned there). > > Note, I am not a native speaker - maybe it sound terrible, worse than for > example using highway as tag also for private roads. > > But I see absolutely no benefit from a completely separate tagging (that > nobody would support). >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
