Talk:Moon
Related to OpenStreetMap project?
Hi, the OpenStreetMap project is a map project of the earth. It is technically not possible to map other planets and it is out of the project's scope. You might want to start your own project outside of OSM to map the moon... --Tigerfell 
(Let's talk) 14:41, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- Hi, OpenStreetMap is indeed a map of the world and rightfully so. At the moment it definitely is technically possible, it would require a lot of work to make it possible though.
- Is it completely outside of the projects scope? The About page does indeed talk about a map of the world and of course that's where everything takes place. But the core values can be applied to other planets as well.
- There unfortunately is no documentation whatsoever about other planets, so it could be seen as irrelevant to this project.
- Only there is no specific mention about other planets being outside of this projects scope either.
- However I think it's wothwhile to explore the possibility of extending this scope. It is fully possible that, by lack of interest, there never is going to be support for such a map. At least not in the near future.
- My thought process was exploring the methodology and challenges we can expect and present that as a possible roadmap for the future. Humans will have permanent residence on mars and the moon relatively soon (<50 years).
- In retrospect it's perhaps better to check if there is willingness in extending the scope before sinking time into an extensive wiki page instead of the other way around. --E de Wit (talk) 11:47, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
- I think as a project it would be totally viable to have an open map of the moon. There are many named features, both natural and man-made on the moon that are mappable and maps of the moon do exist. As a project, I would see this (and indeed a map of any other celestial body) separate from the OSM database we use for OSM. It would be impractical and unnecessary to have this data mixed up with earth's geodata. --Mdeen (talk) 11:25, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- I completely agree that we should not have a combined database and need to avoid cross pollution of geodata at any cost. As for the Wiki a single page with several subsections would probably be enough in the beginning. It may need an entirely seperate wiki further down the line in order to avoid polluting the current documented tags on the wiki. I'll add this to the exploratory study under 'datamanagement' as a point that needs further clarification and elaboration. --E de Wit (talk) 12:23, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- Totally agree. As a spin-off, it is logical to start here where the expertise of datamanagement and mapping has gathered. If this comes to fruition then a new place to continue is easy enough to create. Unfortunately openmoonmap.org has alread been registered.
- I completely agree that we should not have a combined database and need to avoid cross pollution of geodata at any cost. As for the Wiki a single page with several subsections would probably be enough in the beginning. It may need an entirely seperate wiki further down the line in order to avoid polluting the current documented tags on the wiki. I'll add this to the exploratory study under 'datamanagement' as a point that needs further clarification and elaboration. --E de Wit (talk) 12:23, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
- I think as a project it would be totally viable to have an open map of the moon. There are many named features, both natural and man-made on the moon that are mappable and maps of the moon do exist. As a project, I would see this (and indeed a map of any other celestial body) separate from the OSM database we use for OSM. It would be impractical and unnecessary to have this data mixed up with earth's geodata. --Mdeen (talk) 11:25, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Cooperation with Marble (3D map)
I'd suggest to contact them : https://marble.kde.org/features.php The earth maps are (also) based on OSM, several layers for different planets. There are up to 6 lunar landing attempts this year, this should raise the general awareness for this topic Rtfm (talk) 21:39, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Draft tagging ideas: lunar surface features
The Moon page sets out an exploratory brief for mapping the lunar surface but has no formal tagging proposal attached to it yet. Below is a minimal, deliberately narrow first draft covering the three feature types already named on the page — crater, rille, and mare — so any future lunar mapping effort has an agreed vocabulary to build on rather than ad hoc tags. It does not attempt to solve the projection, datum, or rendering questions raised elsewhere on the page; scope is tagging only.
Applies to
Node, way, area (see per-feature guidance below).
Definition
Tags for physiographic features of the lunar surface, aligned where practical with existing natural=* conventions and named according to the IAU Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature where a feature has an official designation.
Tagging
Crater
Impact craters, approximated as a closed way (area) around the rim.
| Key | Value | Comment |
|---|---|---|
natural=* |
natural=crater |
Already in use for terrestrial impact/volcanic craters; reused here rather than inventing a new key |
name=* |
free text | IAU-designated name where one exists |
diameter=* |
number (metres) | Optional, for craters too small to usefully trace as an area |
ref:iau=* |
free text | Optional cross-reference to the Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature entry |
Rille
Linear channel-like features, mapped as a way.
| Key | Value | Comment |
|---|---|---|
natural=* |
natural=rille |
New value; no direct terrestrial equivalent, so not reusing waterway=*
|
rille_type=* |
sinuous / arcuate / linear |
Optional, per standard selenological classification |
name=* |
free text |
Mare
Basaltic plains, mapped as an area.
| Key | Value | Comment |
|---|---|---|
natural=* |
natural=mare |
New value |
name=* |
free text | e.g. Mare Tranquillitatis |
age=* |
pre-nectarian / nectarian / early_imbrian / late_imbrian / eratosthenian / copernican |
Optional, matches the geologic timescale already listed on the Moon page; kept separate from natural=mare so renderers can ignore it
|
Artificial objects (for reference)
Already sketched on the Moon page: man_made=spacecraft with condition=* = operational / not_operational / crashed / intentionally_crashed. Included here only for completeness; not part of this draft's scope.
Rendering
Out of scope for this draft. The Moon page's background-colour and geologic-timescale discussion should be resolved separately, informed by whichever age values get adopted here.
Examples
- Copernicus (crater):
natural=crater,name=Copernicus,diameter=93000 - Vallis Schröteri (rille):
natural=rille,rille_type=sinuous,name=Vallis Schröteri - Mare Tranquillitatis:
natural=mare,name=Mare Tranquillitatis,age=late_imbrian
Open questions
- Whether
natural=*is the right key at all, given these features exist on a body with no atmosphere, water, or biology — an alternative would be a dedicatedmoon:*namespace, but that fragments tooling and duplicates existing renderer logic for little gain. - Diameter/size thresholds for when a crater should be a node vs an area are left to mapper judgement, consistent with how small terrestrial features are handled.
- No claim is made here about which database/instance this data should ultimately live in — that's a Data management question on the Moon page, not a tagging one.
Hope this helps move the discussion forward; and somewhere that the OSM Board is content with.