Talk:Tag:natural=cave entrance

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Why natural=cave was disapproved?

... 12 YES vs. 3 NO a really good ratio ? --Dido 21:45, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


  • Should the tag apply to nodes only? We might as well allow it to apply to areas, since some cave entrances are huge. Beej71 01:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
    • ACK -- Ulfl 00:52, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
      • what is ACK? Myfanwy 04:33, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
        • ACKnowledged -- Ulfl 15:37, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • I would suggest that it was just a node, the cave entrances i have found has not been worthy of anything more.


Voting is open

  • I approve this proposal Myfanwy 21:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal Franc 21:36, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal Beej71 21:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal --Dido 21:40, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal (the simple icon is my favourite) SlowRider 23:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal --Colin Marquardt 23:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal --Ulfl 05:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal raphael 07:26, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal -- MikeCollinson 08:13, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal --Cartinus 12:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal (the simple icon is my favourite) -- Kresp0 14:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal (the simple icon is my favourite) --DrMark 17:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal (the simple icon is my favourite) --Andy 22:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal (the simple icon without the horizontal bar is my favourite) --Gummibaerli 23:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal (the simple icon is my favourite) --Lefty1963 10:16, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

this vote is closed, this proposal has been approved


i have roughly designed an icon but maybe someone with a bit more skill could design one, i hope you can all see what it's meant to be: Cave.png or simpler alternative Cave2.png

the second one looks like a public transport logo from somewhere. sydney maybe? Myfanwy 23:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I think it is close to what has been accepted internationally to indicate caves. --Polyglot 08:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Alternatively, we might take the one from wikipedia ( But the simpler version mentioned above might be more clear. --Babucke 09:37, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
What about the omega symbol? It's used in germany, and i think its nice looking: <math>\Omega</math> --Gormo 00:39, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
It is used in Austria as well, either with a dot in it or not (mainly depending on font size). See Cave#Icons --Fkv (talk) 12:07, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Man made vs natural?

How to distinguish between these two. Example of a man made cave is an abandoned mine.

Access clarification

I propose to clarify the description of the access tagging.

access=... should only contain the legal access into the cave (this is consistent with the use of access=* on highways). barrier=... should contain the actual, physical entrance barrier of the cave.

So a cave that can legally be entered when obtaining a key to a gate from someone should be tagged


and one that has no entrance barrier, but may not be legally entered by the general public should be tagged


--Gormo (talk) 08:10, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

I have now performed these changes: . --Gormo (talk) 08:39, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
It is a common misconception that access=* only means legal access. Access may be restricted not only by law, but also by private owners. When a cave entrance is bricked, you don't have access, no matter if it is prohibited by law or not. barrier=* does not tell if the cave is accessible. A barrier=gate may be locked or unlocked. I know of a cave with a lock whose keys got lost. In that case, we need to tag it barrier=gate + access=no to make it clear that it is not accessible. --Fkv (talk) 12:01, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Show cave and access tunnels

There are showcaves that are only accessible through a man-made entrance tunnel. Should these tunnel entrances be tagged with man_made=adit? If yes, how do we present the fact that there is a showcave? tourism=attraction,attraction=showcave? --Gormo (talk) 15:23, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

For showcaves: tourism=attraction + fee=yes
For man-made entrance tunnels: I stick to natural=cave_entrance anyway. To my knowledge, the term "adit" is used in mining context only. And while the entrance may be not be natural, at least the cave it leads to is. Most visitors won't even notice that the entrance is artificial, unless the guide tells them.
--Fkv (talk) 22:05, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Pit cave / Chasm


There should be a tag to mark a pit cave / chasm. Eg. cave:type=pit or chasm=yes. It could be rendered as U on the map. See also Taginfo --*Martin* (talk) 16:49, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Key names ending in _type or :type are quite common but evil because they are not descriptive. They could mean anything, like size (cave:type=giant) or shape (cave:type=crawl, cave:type=through_cave, cave:type=maze) or bedrock (cave:type=limestone) or genesis (cave:type=breakdown) or access (cave:type=showcave) or protection (cave:type=protected_cave) or fauna/palaeontology (cave:type=bear_cave) etc.
Why not use the standard key incline=*? E.g. incline=-90° for pit caves, incline=down for other downward caves, and incline=up for upward caves (which are typically hot). --Fkv (talk) 21:52, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Pit caves are verticals and it's important to mark this kind of caves for security reasons. Chasm (Canyon) is a linear structure delimited by two cliffs, maybe it's not necessary a new tag. --Pitort (talk) 14:47, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
In principle you could also use a circular cliff, would that be warning enough? There is now Proposed features/natural=cave and pits have been also asked there.RicoZ (talk) 09:02, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Cave used as place of worhship

How to map a man made or natural cave used as place of worhship ?


--Pyrog (talk) 15:24, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

You can combine natural=cave_entrance with religious tags (amenity=place_of_worship + religion=* etc.). If you want to map inventory such as man_made=cross, historic=wayside_shrine, amenity=bench etc., you need separate objects (nodes). There are plenty of tags to tell applications that a feature is underground (location=underground, covered=yes, layer=*, but there's currently no standardized way to define which underground objects belong to which cave entrance. Maybe a site relation... --Fkv (talk) 16:03, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
You should not combine the cave entrance with a place of worship tag in this case. It should be added to natural=cave. —Dieterdreist (talk) 21:01, 1 September 2019 (UTC)