Proposal talk:Landuse=port

For port:type=inland_port , include the type of port on dry land - a direct rail connection to the sea harbor, but used to transfer cargo. For example http://www.port-of-charleston.com/Cargo/ReadytoGrow/sc_inland_port.asp . MikeN (talk) 01:00, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

There's port:type=dryport ("port sec" in french, "porto secco" in italian), which it's also different from Proposed_features/Intermodal_Terminal. What do you think? --Sarchittuorg (talk) 16:58, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Use of RoRo acronym

OSM discourages use of acronyms, therefore I'd suggest use of roll-on_roll-off or something similar, instead of roro.

I used roro for compatibility with OpenSeaMap, and roro is far more used than its expansion (in shipping for example); the definition of IHO uses RoRo in the description. --Sarchittuorg (talk) 16:58, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

I agree, please consider extending the abbreviations like "roro" (roll-on_roll-off), "bulk" (bulk_terminal), etc. Most of your categories could be more explicit in their naming. OSM is a general project, not one of specialists, so it isn't a good argument that specialized documentations and norms do also use abbreviations. In OSM we don't.--Dieterdreist (talk) 15:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

landuse=port not well chosen and described

There is hardly a definition, it is "hidden" under a "differences between harbour and port" but there is no clear definition and description how to structure such a facility in OSM. I am not sure if "port" is nice as landuse value (it is quite specific, even more when adding the subtag "port:category"), I would rather see these as man_made values. --Dieterdreist (talk) 15:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

port:category and port:type

Usage of two classification systems (port:type and port:category), both with generic names, might lead to confusion. I'd try to be more specific with the tag-denominators, e.g. the "port:category" (if I got it right you are proposing to split the port into several smaller areas, each with the tags landuse=port and port:category=* ?) could become distinct man_made (or amenity) tags like man_made=quarantine_station rather than landuse=port and port:category=quarantine. This way you won't need any ambiguous port:category any more and the tags would become more osm-style. --Dieterdreist (talk) 15:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

What is the purpose of landuse=port when landuse=harbour have quite spread usage? Wouldn't it be better to build on that? --Skippern (talk) 20:05, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Two different meaning :-) But if you want to build on that... I need to define container terminals mostly. --Sarchittuorg (talk) 08:03, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Actually the tag landuse=harbour is the nautical usage for landuse=railway, and also seen suggestion of landuse=highway, all of these could theoretically be joined in a landuse=transport, or eventually landuse=port can take care of all of these for Dry Port as well other ports. I know that a harbour not necessary is a port or visa versa (though in my line of work, that is the limitation I am most used to). As I see it, starting with more detailed landuse=port tag would mean revising landuse=harbour, landuse=railway, and possibly landuse=highway and landuse=transport. Segregating too much will result in confusion, not much usage, and complicated rules for renderers. --Skippern (talk) 23:51, 19 July 2014 (UTC)