Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags (was: Re: How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway)

[Jass Kurn]

On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 23:57, Andy Townsend  wrote:

> In terms of access rights*, I've always thought that (in England and
> Wales**) "yes" and "designated" mean both "a legal right to access", as
> opposed to "permissive" that means "you can go there, but that right can be
> removed by the landowner whenever they wish".  What would you say the
> difference between "yes" and "designated" are?
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andy
>
Need to point out for others reading this than I am in England, and
influenced by what I believe was likely the original intent of these tags,
that is mapping of the "English/Welsh, rights of way"

I've always treated " foot|bicycle|horse=yes, as a means of showing I
confidently believe with evidence available that access is allowed. Done
with regard to the defaults for tag (eg don't add when highway=footway)

Designated & Permissive allow me to tag in more detail if evidence is
available to support tags
I use ''designated" for where there is a demonstrable "right of access" eg
Specific recognisable signage, online usable data, etc, which demonstrates
a legislative or contractual, rights of way.
I use "permissive" for the common British situation of ways being provided
on private land, and where the owner has displayed signage to inform the
public that the way is "Permissive" and not an English/Welsh "Public Right
of Way". (This should block the private way becoming a "right of way"
through continuous use.)

Issues I have are separating "legal right of access" and the ability to
actually use the way. A common problem with British/Welsh rights of way
which do not have to be managed to to allow all foot users

Jass
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

[Jass Kurn]

On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 10:03, Peter Neale via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> It is "bicycles=yes" and not "bicycles=designated" because, for a
> bridleway   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbridleway
> "Cyclists also have a right, unless the local authority makes orders to
> the contrary ...The local authority is not obliged to ensure
> suitability for bicycles, unlike for foot or horse users."#
>


Disagree with that, I always map a Public Bridleway as bicycle=designated.
Cyclists have a statutory right to use these ways, which should be meaning
behind the designated. The fact there is no requirement to maintain a
Public Bridleway to a standard acceptable to all cyclists, does not impact
on the right to use the way. It's a secondary matter that does not fall
under "access". Or looking at this in another way. The fact a Public
Footpath does not have to meet standards that would allow ALL pedestrians
to use them, but does not mean a public footpath should be tagged foot=yes

Jass
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] clootie trees/ rag trees

[Jass Kurn]

Trees with cloth ornaments are common in the southwest of England, an area
with a celtic background. Much of what I've heard is already written down
in the Wikipedia page for Clootie_Well . Usually they are small stand out
trees, in a woodland setting near a spring or well. I've heard them named
as "fairy trees", but also cloutie trees. The explanation I've heard
several times is due to celtic tradition. A fundamental celtic belief that
water sources were home to spirits(?). A person with an infliction would
wash themselves down with water from the spring and tie it to a nearby
tree. The ailment would be trapped in the cloth and gradually rot away.

The explanation implies that there once would have been more emphasis on
the water body, but it feels (at least in Cornwall & Devon) that there is
now more emphasis on the tree.

In Devon & Cornwall I've often heard the trees referred to as Fairy trees.
I'd accept the number has increased since the 60's with an increase in
different beliefs.

Definitely worth mapping, and would be nice to see if they are common in
areas associated with Celtic culture.
Don't mind about the tagging, and happy with rag_tree if the wiki page
mentions the other names (eg clootie tree, fairy tree, etc)

When I was a child in Ireland on our farm we had a creepy looking Hawthorn
Tree locally named the "Fairy Tree". It was next to spring/pond, at the
edge of a small raised ring fort. No rags on that one, but a local
tradition that the "fairies" owned that bit of land, and you'd be a fool to
be there after dark. I was often there after dark (standing behind a big
protective dog) but never saw any fairies. Sadly, my uncle cleared the area
and filled in the pond during the 90's to modernise the land and access
some EU grants.

And worth mentioning that in the southwest of England there is
confusingly a clearly separate tradition that can lead to ribbons & objects
in trees. This is the tradition of Wassailing
. A tradition linked to the 12
Night and celebrating Orchards.

Found  nice blog post when looking for information about a tree near me
https://www.terriwindling.com/blog/2015/06/the-blessings-of-the-trees.html

Jass

On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 at 20:53, Anne-Karoline Distel via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> Hello there,
>
> does anyone have any opinions about how to map what is called clootie/
> cloughtie/ cloutie trees in Scotland and rag trees or raggedy bushes in
> Ireland? I have used place_of_worship=rag_tree (to avoid the many
> different spellings) in combination with natural=tree, but there is also
> a category on Wikimedia called "Prayer trees". But for some prayer trees,
> you stick coins in the bark instead of tying rags or ribbons (or other
> votive offerings) to the branches, so I think rag trees should be mapped
> different to coin ones. They're not historic, but still very much in use in
> Ireland, the UK (by Neo-Pagans and Christians alike), and I believe there
> are other cultures like Hinduism who use them.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clootie_well
>
> To my knowledge, "clootie tree" is not used in Ireland at all and wasn't
> in the past either (only in the wikimedia category). In Ireland, the tree
> is also usually not necessarily connected to a well. There is one at the
> Hill of Tara, for example.
>
> If you like fairy tales, I think there is one in Cinderella, at least in
> the Brothers Grimm version. As far as I remember, the dress for the ball
> appeared in the tree.
>
> Anne aka b-unicycling
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

[Jass Kurn]

On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 at 12:48, ael via Tagging 
wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 10:46:39AM +, martianfreeloader wrote:
>
> As a native British English speaker I had never heard of a "bubbler".
> As others have said, I would have called that a drinking_fountian.
> I really don't understand why some people object to that term, but then
>

 I brought up the issue with bubbler not being a British term, but I'm not
really bothered by the specific word "bubbler" which is reasonably
descriptive. Concentrating on the word bubbler is a distraction from what I
think is the main issue.

The issue is the misuse of key:fountain.

The tag amenity=fountain was created to map the entity/object known in
English as fountains, and is documented in the OSM wiki with several
pictures of fountains. eg
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Fountain_at_Milan_citadel.JPG

In English a small structure that spurts out drinking water is commonly
referred to as a "drinking fountain". . "Drinking Fountain" contains the
word fountain but it is not a fountain. In the same way "car park" contains
the word park but is not a "park".  OSM has a reasonable tag of
amenity=drinking_water to map drinking water sources.

At some point a contributor decided to create a key to primarily document
types of amenity_water and "specific types of drinking water fountains".
They made, in my opinion, a huge mistake by naming it key:fountain. The tag
guidance is then added to the fountain wiki page. The result is the
existence of tags such as fountain=bubbler, and fountain=bottle_refill.
When it should be, as a suggestion,  drinking_water:type=bubbler, or
drinking_water:type=bottle_refill.

Jass
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Re: [Tagging] Deprecation proposal: man_made=drinking_fountain

[Jass Kurn]

I can not agree with deleting this tag while the rest of the tagging for
drinking water is such a mess. It feels as if you're concentrating on an
ant in the corner of the room while ignoring the dancing elephant in the
middle of the room.

Do feel it should eventually be deleted, but as part of sorting out issues
with using "fountain" and "drinking fountain" sharing part of the same tag.
They're different entities, in the way "park" and "car park" are different.

I've just noticed there is a bubbler tag being promoted? Which appears to
be an American English term for a British English drinking fountain. Why
promote another term, and use an American English term. What was wrong with
calling a drinking fountain a drinking fountain?
As I'm writing this, I'm also looking at the wiki and realising it's even
more complex than I thought when I first started. I'll go off and read some
more, but I'm beginning to think the only solution would be depreciating
the whole subject area (not possible) and starting again.

Jass



On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 13:51, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> I am not entirely how to solve various issues surrounding drinking water
> terminology
> (help highly welcomed!) but it is now really clear to me that
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Ddrinking_fountain
> is not helpful at all and it should be marked as deprecated
>
> - many drinking fountains are eligible for man_made=water_tap
> - it duplicates https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:fountain%3Dbubbler
> - as stated this tag is equivalent to
>   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:fountain%3Dbubbler
>   but there are also water fountain which are not emitting
>   upward jet of water in the air
>
> So we have tag which for many (all?) features collides with better
> established tag AND it is duplicated AND it is poorly named AND it is
> rarely used
> AND it introduces confusion.
>
> Can we mark it as deprecated and recommend not using it?
> With replacement of man_made=water_tap where applicable - which is
> likely for all cases or almost all cases.
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging