2018-01-15 8:54 GMT+01:00 OSMDoudou < 19b350d2-b1b3-4edb-ad96-288ea1238...@gmx.com>:
> It would be a pity to not do justice to the artwork element in this sort > of pavement. > > Not sure what to suggest however, but maybe something with > artwork_type=mosaic ? [1] > > [1] https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/artwork_type=mosaic I agree that it seems interesting to add not only one of the established generic surface tags, but to also give a hint that it is a kind of mosaic / iconic depiction. Still, I would not call it "artwork" or "artwork_type=mosaic" in the case that was referenced above, as it isn't "art" (IMHO), similarly as a plaque on a wall is not generally a "painting". I'd rather subtype the surface value to something specific like paving_stones=portugese_pavement In this context, I'd also change the definition of "surface=paving_stones" to account for this case. Currently it reads: "... The gaps between the paving stones are smaller because the stones have a perfectly regular shape (rectangular, or any surface-filling shape)." this is not logical, and I believe is not what is intended: the stones don't have to "perfectly regular shape[d] (rectangular, or any surface-filling shape)". they could just as well be irregularly shaped, what is important is that there aren't big gaps, IMHO the above definition could be like this: ""... The gaps between individual paving stones are very narrow, either because the stones have a perfectly regular shape (rectangular, or any surface-filling shape) or because they have been carefully selected, fitted and placed in order to form an even, closed surface." (or something similar). Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
