Am So., 11. Nov. 2018 um 12:17 Uhr schrieb Sergio Manzi <s...@smz.it>:
> Hello everybody, > > I'm the one who, in the Italian mailing list, first brought out the issue > about how to tag estimated heights (*in our context it was about trees > height*). > > My first proposal has been to use a new sub-key in which to store > estimated values, as in "height:estimated=10". > > Then I saw, here, the proposal of using "source:height=estimated", which > is in use (*1543 entries, mostly applied to ways: see: *[1]), which I > thought was a better solution then the one I originally conceived. > > Now I see that there is a different solution in use, > "height:source=estimated", which is less used (*149 entries, mostly > applied to ways: see: *[2]), but *makes even more sense to me, from a > syntactical point of view*. > > Someone also proposed to use "height:accuracy=*" if the accuracy is known, > but I think this could be used for an estimated value too > (height:accuracy=estimated). On the other hand this doesn't seems to be in > use anywhere even though it might be considered an even better solution > both syntactically and semantically (*I think "source" should be used to > identify "who" is the originator of the information*). > > In any case I think the various est_(width|length|height|whatever) keys > should be deprecated and a new universal solution to identify estimated > values should be adopted, taken from the ones described above (*or a new > one I'm not thinking of** at this time*)*.* > I believe there is way too much fuzz about this, almost every number in OSM is estimated, the height of a tree cannot be measured to the mm even with the most precise instruments (and even if you could, it would be outdated within the same day). Just add the height. Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
