Am Do., 28. Nov. 2019 um 01:23 Uhr schrieb Graeme Fitzpatrick < graemefi...@gmail.com>:
> A berm, in modern usage, does indeed refer to any number of broadly > similar concepts, in that it is (usually) a simple pile of dirt, either > bare, or covered with grass. > > So how about changing the definition to: > " A *Berm <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Berm>* in modern usage, is a > raised barrier (usually made of compacted earth, either bare or grass > covered) separating two areas. It can have many applications, including as > a defensive fortification line, a protective barrier, a border/separation > barrier or in industrial or sporting settings". > Is that better? > > I believe we should define the tags according to their meaning. If I get this right, a berm is defined through their shape, is describing a physical characteristic. Therefor the definition should not be about the applications / function. For the function we should add additional tags if deemed useful by the mapper. So there would be a tag to say it is a berm (man made earthwork of certain shapes), and another one that says there is a fortification line, or a protection for a shooting range, or whatever. Jan Michel wrote: > - We should have a defined way to tag the purpose of the berm - e.g. > berm = noise_barrier > along the reasoning above, I would expect the key "berm" to describe a type of berm. I am not an expert for earthworks, but I am pretty sure there will be subtypes of berms describing maybe physical characteristics or other constructive details (e.g. how it was built, if there is reinforcement, etc.) Therefore functional characteristics like "this is there for noise protection" should go into another tag (would have to discuss what makes sense). Cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
