Am 20. Mai 2019 16:30:30 MESZ schrieb Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>: > >It seem to me that the presence of public passenger flights is the >basic idea of the word "airport" to the general public (pilots certain >have different ideas, but they have their own specialized databases), >and it would be good if we could tag this in a consistent way. > >For use by pilots, and for people considering charter flights, it may >be useful to make a distinction between "general aviation" airports >that have services like hangars, fuel, staff etc, versus an airstrip >in a farmer's field which lacks any services or facilities other than >an unpaved runway.
I assume that OSM will not be used for aviatory navigation purposes out of security reasons ( at least I hope the pilots flying me around do so following aviation-specific maps...) . Rather, it's aim is to serve people on the ground. So we shouldn't primarily look at the requirements of pilots but of ordinary users. So I agree with Joseph that the relevant differentiation happens between airfields with only general aviation and airports with commercial services. This line should be clearly drawn in mapping. Also, this enables renderers to only show commercial airports on larger scales and not any airstrip in the same way as big international airports. Facilities at airports that may be relevant to pilots should then be tagged apart from the classification of the airport. Best, Jan _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
