2010/9/11 Nathan Edgars II <nerou...@gmail.com>: > On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 5:27 AM, David Groom <revi...@pacific-rim.net> wrote: >> What's the preferred way of tagging a mast like this >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rowridge_from_entrance_gate_200704270010.jpg >> >> From memory I had thought it was man_made=mast, but I cant find any mention >> of that on the wiki. >> >> I see on the wiki there is a" man_made=tower" + "tower:type=communication" >> combination, but I'm not sure the picture above is a "tower". >> >> To my mind a "tower" is something free standing, whilst a mast is a much >> thinner structure supported by wires > > It's a guyed tower.
a tower is "self-supporting", which might be read as contradictory to guys (unless you consider the guys being part of the tower itself). I wouldn't actually tag antennas as towers. The wiki doesn't help a lot, defining a tower as "A man made tower", but it indicates in some way that tagging should refer to what is commonly referred to as a "tower". There is another issue I found while searching tower: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dwater_tower subtagging might have been appropriate for those as well, at least they are much more towers than antennas are. (not all tall structures are commonly identified as towers). another issue I see with the man_made=tower definition in the wiki is the construction part which was introduced without any notification here or discussion (AFAIK) : >>>>> tower:construction lattice Node The tower is >>>>> constructed from steel lattice (most have guy wires) this is fine beside the "most have guy wires" because 1) that's not true IMHO 2) "most" is not suitable for a definition. Either yes or no or it's not a criteria IMHO. >>>>> tower:construction freestanding Node The tower is >>>>> freestanding 'heavy' construction such as concrete, steel or wood >>>>> this is the basic definition required to be a tower, it is not a construction principle and not opposed to lattice. >>>>> tower:construction dish Node The 'communication tower' is a >>>>> parabolic dish is not a tower, but a tower might have dishes attached >>>>> tower:construction dome Node The 'communication tower' is a >>>>> dome (or 'golf-ball') construction, with antenna elements concealed from >>>>> view the same issue as dish. If it is not a dome supported by a tower but just a dome this will not be a tower IMHO. >>>>> tower:construction concealed Node The 'communication >>>>> tower' is concealed/disguised (for example: made to look like a tree). IMHO not a construction type either. What about masquerade=yes or something similar? I'd like to see different subtags here: purpose/usage and construction type, construction time, shape, construction style (gothic, baroque, rationalist, neo-traditional, renaissance, futurist, industrial (this is of course a generalization, but can help the normal mapper and could be further refined by specialists) ...) Purpose: there are church towers, bell towers, watch towers, towers in city walls (and gate-towers in specific), towers in castles (regional differences, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bergfried ) , towers in town houses (e.g. in medieval cities), skyscrapers (might not be desired here, let's discuss it), defensive towers (different types: inside a wall/part of a fortress, or freestanding, used as support for anti aircraft cannons or normal cannons ( http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:Kufstein_burgen.jpg&filetimestamp=20060417221241 ) or bowmen, or...), towers as support for restaurants, viewing platforms, antennas, ...), and lots of others there are also various kinds of industrial towers (e.g. cooling towers, ...) construction types: lattice (steel, wood, plastic/fibreglass, concrete(?)) "solid" ones (masonry, concrete (pre-fabricated or "on the ground one"), wood) ... Shape: regarding the bottom/support: rectangular circular hexagonal octagonal (e.g. http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:Neunkirchen-am-Brand-St.-Michaelkirche-Turmspitze.jpeg&filetimestamp=20050606154539 ) polygonal (other amount of polygons, probably the better approach, polygonal and corners=8 instead of octagonal) other regarding the top (tower:top): tower:top=cone (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Round_tower,_Glendalough.jpg ) pyramid (e.g. http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:Schlieren_Gaswerk_Turm-2.jpg&filetimestamp=20060901154641 ) sphere/dome (or modern multipolygonal "sherized" constructions) flat (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UCSBStorkeTower.jpg ) onion_dome (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kostroma_resurrection.jpg ) regarding the base (tower:base) above ground. regarding the foundation (tower:foundation) below ground / at ground level regarding the shaft (might be assumed that the shaft is what is tagged without subtags i.e. the "main tower" or the base, but this depends on how the tower is actually constructed, of how many different vertical parts it consists) subtagged: tower:merlons=yes/no (see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Creneau.romain.png and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Genova-Castello_Mackenzie-DSCF8928.JPG ) tower:top:sign=yes/cross/coat_of_arms/sculpture/...) tower:top:lantern=yes As this is really a wide field all those suggested values are just suggestions and cover only a part of all needed values. Of course you can also combine subtags like tower:top=cone with tower:top:height=10 tower:top:width=5 (regarding the width at the base of the "top", to be evaluable there has to be the height of the I would like to be able to tag something like this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/b/b5/Stundturm_Schaessburg.JPG or this with parametrical values that allow for three-dimensional reconstruction as simple 3D-models: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Dom_von_Altenburger_Stra%C3%9Fe_2003-09-22.JPG which is a rectangular base (quite frequent) and a cone-shaped "broken" (one corner) top with octagonal "top-base" (locally also frequent for this time and purpose) For mapping of towers as parts of buildings I'd suggest drawing the outline of the base and attach additionally to the above values building=part, part=tower (or is there already another approach for mapping building parts? Maybe the part=tower is not needed, as this is already clear from the man_made tag). These parts could be combined by a new relation type building (I don't like to use site because a site will often consist of more than one building, and by using a dedicated relation-type it will be less ambiguous and easier to understand for mappers IMHO). Sorry for the longish mail. Are there any immediate additions? What do you think about proposing such a variety of values? Is there a better approach? Would you support such a proposal? cheers Martin _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
