Proposal:Taxonomic rank
| Taxonomic rank | |
|---|---|
| Proposal status: | Canceled (inactive) |
| Proposed by: | SebasOSM |
| Tagging: | taxon:rank=*
|
| Applies to: | |
| Definition: | A dedicated key to define taxonomic ranks. |
| Statistics: |
|
| Draft started: | 2025-10-24 |
| RFC start: | 2025-10-25 |
This proposal has been canceled in favour of an ongoing discussion that is already leading to a different proposal.
Proposal
A
Taxonomic rank indicates an organism’s hierarchical level. Lower ranks are more specific than higher ranks. Ranks are currently often tagged with rank-specific keys (e.g., species=*, genus=*) or with taxon-subkeys like taxon:cultivar=*. An alternative is to use only the taxon=*, but without a rank-specific key it is unclear which rank the taxon=* value represents — which is precisely the original intent of the taxon=* key.
For mappers who do know the rank, I propose a new key: taxon:rank=*. This key records the taxonomic rank using a fixed pattern. That makes taxon=* more usable because you no longer need to add rank-specific keys to indicate which rank is stored in taxon=*.
The following is proposed:
- Introduction of a two-key principle —
taxon=*andtaxon:rank=*— to record taxa and their corresponding rank so mappers don’t have to add extra rank-specific tags. - Bundling of extra metadata keys (such as Wikidata and common name) under the same
taxon=*key. - Keep supporting rank-specific keys.
- Retention of
taxon=*'s original loose interpretation, with the option to verify the taxonomic rank viataxon:rank=*.
Rationale
The two-key principle
Taxonomic ranks are currently spread across different keys. Basic ranks are usually tagged with genus=* and species=*, with the mapper typically tagging the most specific rank (species > genus).
Tagging becomes more complicated for
infraspecific names (e.g., subspecies) and for cultivated plants. For example, Fraxinus angustifolia subsp. oxycarpa 'Raywood' is commonly tagged as:
taxon=Fraxinus angustifolia subsp. oxycarpa 'Raywood'species=Fraxinus angustifoliataxon:subspecies=oxycarpataxon:cultivar=Raywood
Because taxon=* does not state the taxonomic rank, it is unusable from a data perspective. To express the taxonomic rank we tag species=*, taxon:subspecies=* and taxon:cultivar=* separately. Yet the isolated values for subspecies and cultivar are meaningless without the context of taxon=*, so why tag them separately? It’s redundant because the information is already in taxon=*; the problem is that it’s unclear to a script or person how to parse it. taxon:rank=* fills that role by indicating the pattern of the taxon=* value. Let's apply this to the example above:
Here taxon:rank=cultivated_subspecies implies the pattern <genus> <species> subsp. <subspecies> '<cultivar>', so you don’t need to tag subspecies or cultivar as separate keys.
Extra metadata tags
Extra metadata such as Wikidata and common name are usually tagged on rank-specific keys (e.g., species:wikidata=*, genus:en=*). This metadata can instead be bundled under the taxon=* key; this is already done in part. Combined with taxon:rank=* it becomes clear which taxonomic rank the metadata refers to. For example, taxon:wikidata=* together with taxon:rank=* indicates the Wikidata Q-item for the specified taxonomic rank.
If you need metadata for a different rank — for instance if a subspecies lacks a common name but the species has one — rank-specific variants can be used, e.g. taxon:en:<taxon_rank>=*. This keeps Wikidata and common-name tags bundled under the same taxon namespace rather than spread over many rank-specific keys.
The taxon:rank=* key is optional and does not replace existing keys
This proposal aims to make taxon=* more usable and to bundle Wikidata and common names under a consistent key. taxon=* without taxon:rank=* remains a loose interpretation. Rank-specific keys remain valid and usable.
Tagging
| Taxonomic Rank pattern | taxon_rank | Example | Proposed tagging | Currently tagged as |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| <genus> | genus | Fraxinus |
| |
| <genus> <species> | species | Fraxinus angustifolia |
| |
| <genus> <species> '<cultivar>' | cultivated_species | Fraxinus angustifolia 'Flame' |
| |
| <genus> <species> subsp. <subspecies> | subspecies | Fraxinus angustifolia subsp. pannonica |
| |
| <genus> <species> subsp. <subspecies> '<cultivar>' | cultivated_subspecies | Fraxinus angustifolia subsp. oxycarpa 'Raywood' |
| |
| <genus> <species> var. <variety> | variety | Fraxinus angustifolia var. pilosa |
| |
| <genus> <species> f. <variety> | form | Fraxinus angustifolia f. obtusiuscula |
|
Note: Species is already a binomial name (consisting of two parts), but for clarity genus and species are separated here.
Examples
| Tagging |
|---|
| Example #1 |
Example #2
1 There is no Wikidata for this cultivated species, so instead we use the Wikidata of the species. 2 There is no vernacular name for this cultivated species or species, so instead we use the vernecular name of the genus. |
| Example #3 |
Rendering
This key does not require additional rendering.
Features/Pages affected
- Tag:natural=tree
- Tag:natural=shrubbery
- Tag:natural=shrub
- Tag:natural=wood
- Tag:natural=flowers
- Tag:natural=grassland
- Tag:natural=plant
- Tag:landcover=grass
- Key:genus
- Key:species
- Key:species:wikidata
- Key:species:de
- Key:species:cs
- Key:species:no
- Key:species:en
- Key:genus:it
- Key:taxon
- Key:genus:en
- Key:taxon:cultivar
- Tag:taxon:family=Arecaceae
External discussions
- https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/rfc-feature-proposal-taxonomic-rank/137216 (Global OSM Tagging general discussion)
- https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/voorstel-introduceren-tag-voor-taxonomische-rang/137259 (Dutch OSM Community)
Comments
Please comment on the discussion page.