1) To tag a named "Torp" it sounds like there are several different correct options, depending on what currently exists at the location.
If there is a single family home or a couple of homes used as residences, it would be a place=isolated_dwelling mapped as a node at the centre. If it is still used as a farm, then place=farm can be used on a node instead. This is treated as similar to place=isolated_dwelling by many data users. It is also possible to map the area of the farmyard (around the buildings) as landuse=farmyard and add the name to this feature, if the name is only for the actual farm buildings and not for all the surrounding areas. For a named settlement with more than 2 families (but smaller than a village), place=hamlet on a node would be appropriate. I'm not sure if a torp is every that large? If the torp is no longer inhabited, you can use a lifecycle tag to show this: e.g. abandoned:place=farm or abandoned:place=isolated_dwelling or abandoned:place=hamlet show that a former farm or small settlement are now abandoned and no longer inhabited. 2) For a mountain: Most mountains share a name with their highest peak, so natural=peak is a great way to tag these. But it's true that some "mountain" names are not the name of a peak. In this case there are a couple other tags in use: natural=ridge is used with a linear way which is drawn along the ridgeline. This works for many named single ridges. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dridge - example here: https://www.opentopomap.org/#map=15/41.76382/-123.18038 - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/631166206/#map=13/41.7664/-123.1567&layers=C Sometimes a named "mountain" is not a single ridge but a whole range of connected ridges. In this case we usually call it a "mountain range" in English, and there is a somewhat uncommon tag for this natural=mountain_range which I've used to map some ranges in my area. This tag is harder to use. In some cases the best option is to use it on a node at the center of the mountain range, in others it is possible to use it on a linear way along the highest line of ridges at the center of the mountain range. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Anatural%3Dmountain_range - example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/686647385#map=12/42.0515/-122.7575&layers=C While we can all disagree on how far down into the valley the mountain extends, everyone agrees that the highest peak is part of the mountain, so mapping peaks of a mountain as a node is 100% verifiably to be correct. In some cases a linear way is also verifiable for a ridge or a linear mountain range. -- Joseph Eisenberg On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 7:04 AM Ture Pålsson via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > > 13 dec. 2020 kl. 15:21 skrev Paul Allen <pla16...@gmail.com>: > > I'm probably misunderstanding this, but torp doesn't seem to be a type of > building. The tag building=torp says that this building IS a torp (as > opposed to a house, or a shop, or a garage, or a shed, or a barn). > If you feel a need to indicate that a building was once part of a torp, > building=torp isn't the way to do it. > > > You’re right; I was extremely sloppy with terminology there. A torp is (or > rather was) a small farm, usually either part of a bigger farm and farmed > by a tenant, paying rent to the bigger farm in the form of work, or farmed > by a soldier (paying rent by, well, being a soldier). Today, most of them > are either completely gone or used as summer houses, very probably not with > the original building. > > I suppose what I wanted to say was: > > * place=locality is used about all sorts of things, both inhabited and > uninhabited, and is pretty much useless. > > * There are many places around Sweden (and probably the rest of the world > as well!) where there is just forest (or fields) today, that have a name > because they were, at some time, a torp (or some other kind of settlement). > To render these in ”swedish topo-map style” (i.e, italics), some sort of > tagging is needed to say ”this place has a name because it used to be a > farm/torp/whatever, but today there is nothing here”. (I suppose some would > argue that these should not be in OSM at all, because they are very hard to > verify on the ground). > > * There are also isolated dwellings, hamlets, villages, suburbs and > airport car parks (comparing old and present-day maps around > Stockholm-Arlanda airport is quite fun) whose names refer to long-gone > torps, but those can be tagged according to their present-day usage. > > And I’d like to apologize to Anders for derailing this thread by bringing > up the subject at all! It was intended as an illustration of the > uselessness of locality, but I got a bit carried away. Trying to render > consistent maps from inconsistent OSM data does that to you. =) > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging