Re: [OSM-talk] no-go-areas
On Jan 5, 2020, at 9:48 PM, Julien djakk wrote: > Hello ! For this kind of tagging, which is as subjective as the > highway=secondary, there should be a consensus of local mappers. > > This kind of areas could be tagged as “you need to know the area to be safe > among locals” :-) I listen to this as potentially reasonable, but I am left with the (obvious?) question: what, exactly, is the specific hazard? Is it characterizable, identifiable? Is there a formal border around it? Does everybody agree? All of those seem difficult "to be (true) simultaneously" (as I understand what is meant when somebody suggests "avoid that area because of, or unless..."), so I fall on the side of "if no identifiable hazard, then no specific tag." In short, I think we agree: too subjective. Even WITH a consensus of local mappers, I don't believe it stands tall enough unless it rises to "true" for all three of those questions. And likely some more I haven't typed here, too. (Others might). Specific hazards, that are characterizable, identifiable, confined to a well-defined area and widely agreed upon? Yes, Earth likely has some of those. A node tagged hazard=* might work well. This feels like a rough sketch only (still) despite getting shot down repeatedly as an unfocused or wholly wrong idea. SteveA ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] no-go-areas
Hello ! For this kind of tagging, which is as subjective as the
highway=secondary, there should be a consensus of local mappers.
This kind of areas could be tagged as “you need to know the area to be safe
among locals” :-)
Julien “djakk”
Le lun. 6 janv. 2020 à 05:23, Paul Johnson a écrit :
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 12:10 PM Mark Wagner
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 16:14:30 +0100
>> Martin Trautmann wrote:
>>
>> > hi all,
>> >
>> > did you read about the Suisse tourist couple which was shot because
>> > they got lost in a Brasilian favela?
>> >
>> > NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) from Tuesday 31.12.2019. ("Schweizer
>> > Ehepaar bei Irrfahrt duch Favela in Brasilien
>> > angeschossen")
>> >
>> > Other examples are e.g. Mafia areas within Kosovo - or name your own
>> > home town no-go area.
>> >
>> > Is there any option to mark certain areas in order to bypass routing
>> > whenever possible?
>> >
>>
>> The problem is that most of these "no-go" areas are subjective, both in
>> boundary and in level of danger. If you ask a half-dozen people, you
>> might get a half-dozen responses ranging from "I go there all the time"
>> to "The police don't patrol in less than platoon strength".
>>
>
> Yeah, I get this same impression. This has the potential to rear its head
> in a really classist, and varying ranges of racist, ways as well. For
> example, go post on Reddit on any given city's subreddit, and ask "I'm
> moving to ___, what parts of town should I avoid?" Fair warning, try this
> for a city you're familiar with, and be prepared to die a little inside
> with the answers you get.
>
> Personally, I'm more likely to consider middle-class suburbia a no-go area
> because large parking lots make it easy for car prowlers no matter how many
> police are on the streets, transit coverage tends to be iffy before morning
> and after evening peak commuter hours, and 5+-lane-wide boulevards tend to
> be not-safe-for-life if you need to traverse them without using a car.
> Your mileage may vary.
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] no-go-areas
On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 12:10 PM Mark Wagner wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 16:14:30 +0100
> Martin Trautmann wrote:
>
> > hi all,
> >
> > did you read about the Suisse tourist couple which was shot because
> > they got lost in a Brasilian favela?
> >
> > NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) from Tuesday 31.12.2019. ("Schweizer
> > Ehepaar bei Irrfahrt duch Favela in Brasilien
> > angeschossen")
> >
> > Other examples are e.g. Mafia areas within Kosovo - or name your own
> > home town no-go area.
> >
> > Is there any option to mark certain areas in order to bypass routing
> > whenever possible?
> >
>
> The problem is that most of these "no-go" areas are subjective, both in
> boundary and in level of danger. If you ask a half-dozen people, you
> might get a half-dozen responses ranging from "I go there all the time"
> to "The police don't patrol in less than platoon strength".
>
Yeah, I get this same impression. This has the potential to rear its head
in a really classist, and varying ranges of racist, ways as well. For
example, go post on Reddit on any given city's subreddit, and ask "I'm
moving to ___, what parts of town should I avoid?" Fair warning, try this
for a city you're familiar with, and be prepared to die a little inside
with the answers you get.
Personally, I'm more likely to consider middle-class suburbia a no-go area
because large parking lots make it easy for car prowlers no matter how many
police are on the streets, transit coverage tends to be iffy before morning
and after evening peak commuter hours, and 5+-lane-wide boulevards tend to
be not-safe-for-life if you need to traverse them without using a car.
Your mileage may vary.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] no-go-areas
Right, Martin; thanks. Joseph and I discussed off-list there is some conflation of tags from hazard=* which intersect well with at least one or two existing military=* tag values. So, yes, there is some overlap with existing tag (natural=cliff, too). I have read our hazard wiki (thanks for the ref) and also mentioned to Joseph that hazard=* seems (in addition to being 12 years old and ripe for an update) a bit too much "car and driver" oriented. For example, if a sign warns of "moose crossing" or "children often play near this roadway here" OK, put that sign on a node onto or next to the highway. In addition to chasm going away, radioactive hazards (there's ionizing radiation, RF energy...) and that there are even places where you wouldn't want to be standing during a thunderstorm as they are struck by lightning repeatedly (yes, really: seems there might be one or two in Texas and Canada) there are really verifiable "hazard=yes" places (that are not subjective and quite verifiable) where a node and a brief mention might be a real thing we could very well want to add to our map. Nudge forward, I don't have massive passion or energy to go much further with it, next up, please! (Yeah). What a great project, OSM. (I truly mean that). SteveA ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] no-go-areas
sent from a phone > On 31. Dec 2019, at 19:37, stevea wrote: > > Many (most?) like radiation, live minefields, military bombing areas, military=danger_area https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:military%3Ddanger_area hazard=* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/hazard Cheers Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] no-go-areas
I've certainly tagged plenty of natural=cliff (and I'm not done yet), there's lots of them around me. So perhaps hazard=chasm could deprecate as one value of the proposed key hazard, deferring to natural=cliff. Still, there are plenty of objective, not-going-away-soon, not-politically-sensitive hazards on Earth. We should map and render them, but to do so, we might resurrect a more-modern version of the hazard tag proposal. Or anything else that would do the job. These do seem like good, smart things to map. Good dialog, thank you everybody. SteveA > On Dec 31, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Mateusz Konieczny > wrote: > > 31 Dec 2019, 19:35 by stevea...@softworkers.com: > Really? Actual, real-life hazards like [chasm > natural=cliff? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] no-go-areas
31 Dec 2019, 19:35 by stevea...@softworkers.com: > Really? Actual, real-life hazards like [chasm > natural=cliff?___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] no-go-areas
Really? Actual, real-life hazards like [chasm, radiation, rock_slide, minefield...] are not worthy of that tag on a node and some Carto-code to toss up a triangle-! icon on our map? Where's the harm? (Literally). Perhaps we implement these without including (or specifically EXcluding) the more "sensitive" ones which are considered "subjective." We can't be "too subjective" if we aren't subjective at all. But, explicitly objective hazards do seem worthy to map. Many (most?) like radiation, live minefields, military bombing areas, sharp bluffs / cliffs are not transient at all and would likely remain as long-term hazards. I think we should revisit this rather than dismiss it matter-of-factly as "oh, that hazard thing that pops its head up every year or so." SteveA ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] no-go-areas
This question rears its head every year or so & the conclusions are
always the same:
Far too subjective, Far too transient. Best left to be shown as an
overlay by local authorities.
My police force produce both crime & road traffic collision maps.
DaveF
On 31/12/2019 15:14, Martin Trautmann wrote:
hi all,
did you read about the Suisse tourist couple which was shot because they
got lost in a Brasilian favela?
NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) from Tuesday 31.12.2019. ("Schweizer Ehepaar
bei Irrfahrt duch Favela in Brasilien
angeschossen")
Other examples are e.g. Mafia areas within Kosovo - or name your own
home town no-go area.
Is there any option to mark certain areas in order to bypass routing
whenever possible?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] no-go-areas
On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 16:14:30 +0100
Martin Trautmann wrote:
> hi all,
>
> did you read about the Suisse tourist couple which was shot because
> they got lost in a Brasilian favela?
>
> NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) from Tuesday 31.12.2019. ("Schweizer
> Ehepaar bei Irrfahrt duch Favela in Brasilien
> angeschossen")
>
> Other examples are e.g. Mafia areas within Kosovo - or name your own
> home town no-go area.
>
> Is there any option to mark certain areas in order to bypass routing
> whenever possible?
>
The problem is that most of these "no-go" areas are subjective, both in
boundary and in level of danger. If you ask a half-dozen people, you
might get a half-dozen responses ranging from "I go there all the time"
to "The police don't patrol in less than platoon strength".
--
Mark
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] no-go-areas
As a long-time OSMer, I offer perspective on two "dangerous areas" near me, one past, one present. On my university campus (University of California) there WAS an area in a meadow which was grazed by cattle (both from the original landuse from a century ago and presently, as these meadows are grazed by cattle even today, at a university of tens of thousands of students). A decade and longer ago, there was a swale (low-lying area) which I believe was human-converted into a sort of reservoir for watering cattle, but it had steep sides, was quite deep and could be impossible for humans or cattle to escape if they fell into it, especially when empty / dry. Not by me, but this was marked on OSM as a "no go area," which I always found curious, as that wasn't an explicitly defined tag. I'm nearly certain that today, this dangerous area has been "remedied" (filled in with dirt) and no longer exists as a hazard on campus. In OSM, there is no longer anything (node, way) in the area to tag as such; it has effectively disappeared from both the real world and our map. Also near me is a "beach" (it sort of is, sort of isn't) which is a dangerous place to ocean-swim, it is known locally as the "Toilet Bowl" as it has nasty churning surf and undertow currents which I believe have drowned at least one person. When I heard local news that such a drowning occurred yet again, I endeavored to tag a node there with name=Toilet Bowl (dangerous area, no swimming) + swimming=no + hazard=yes. (Yes, I know that violates "name is name only"). Also, there isn't a "physical" tag (like natural=beach, as that is unusual, though not wholly wrong, on a node). Yet I couldn't help but feel that hazard=yes, a "draft / underway proposal" (since 2007?! really?) is insufficient: the value "yes" isn't documented in the proposal, and others listed there, like chasm, radiation, rock_slide, minefield, playing_children... didn't fit a dangerous swimming area. Plus, the hazard tag doesn't render (a triangle with exclamation point might be a good starting icon). I believe OSM needs better, explicit tagging to identify dangerous, hazardous areas, and Carto should render these. There are many different kinds of these, from those I just noted, to "high-crime area" and what others might consider sensitive or political. (We shouldn't be afraid to say that an explicit hazard exists if one does). A proposal that seems to have gotten stuck for 12 years seems it's a good starting point, can it be resurrected? OSM mapping these would be another welcome feature in our map, as I know of no other general-purpose map (that IS how many use OSM) which identifies these sorts of "everyday" hazards. Think about it: a hazardous situation might find YOU one day, and you might be very glad you saw this on a map beforehand so you could avoid it. SteveA California ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] no-go-areas
Wouldn't that just be a crime map or a bias towards areas vs others.
Sounds like an osm use case more than a needed tag
On Tue., Dec. 31, 2019, 10:18 a.m. Martin Trautmann, wrote:
> hi all,
>
> did you read about the Suisse tourist couple which was shot because they
> got lost in a Brasilian favela?
>
> NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) from Tuesday 31.12.2019. ("Schweizer Ehepaar
> bei Irrfahrt duch Favela in Brasilien
> angeschossen")
>
> Other examples are e.g. Mafia areas within Kosovo - or name your own
> home town no-go area.
>
> Is there any option to mark certain areas in order to bypass routing
> whenever possible?
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] no-go-areas
hi all,
did you read about the Suisse tourist couple which was shot because they
got lost in a Brasilian favela?
NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) from Tuesday 31.12.2019. ("Schweizer Ehepaar
bei Irrfahrt duch Favela in Brasilien
angeschossen")
Other examples are e.g. Mafia areas within Kosovo - or name your own
home town no-go area.
Is there any option to mark certain areas in order to bypass routing
whenever possible?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
