On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 6:50 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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=portuguese_pavement
That also made sense to me a while back, but I'm a little afraid of how far this could be pushed with further specific values. A British wikipedian [1] pointed out a British consultant [2] that cites other artsy patterns such as the Belgian or the Florentine. Perhaps the pattern would ideally be represented by an open-set sub-tag such as paving_style=portuguese/belgian/florentine/european/random/[other types]. Then for sidewalks we could use sidewalk:[side]:paving_style likewise. > 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). That's what makes most sense to me. So for paving stones the important distinguishing qualities are being flat and having tight gaps, not so much a regular cut. Then I think we should also clarify that surface=setts refer only to certain larger types of setts, with larger gaps between them. [2] And that cobblestones refers to a pavement made of reasonably large, natural, rounded stones. [3] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cobblestone#Cobbles_and_Setts [2] http://www.pavingexpert.com/setts01.htm [3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:surface#Cobbles_should_be_described_as_rounded_for_clarity -- Fernando Trebien +55 (51) 9962-5409 "Nullius in verba." _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
