[Talk-us] weeklyOSM #457 2019-04-16-2019-04-22

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 457,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things 
happening in the openstreetmap world: http://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/11968/

Enjoy! 

Did you know that you can also submit messages for the weeklyOSM? Just log in 
to https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login with your OSM account. Read more about 
how to write a post here: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

weeklyOSM? 
who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

[Talk-us] weeklyOSM #457 2019-04-16-2019-04-22

[weeklyteam]

The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 457,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things 
happening in the openstreetmap world: http://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/11906/

Enjoy! 

Did you know that you can also submit messages for the weeklyOSM? Just log in 
to https://osmbc.openstreetmap.de/login with your OSM account. Read more about 
how to write a post here: 
http://www.weeklyosm.eu/this-news-should-be-in-weeklyosm 

weeklyOSM? 
who: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: 
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Parks in the USA, leisure=park, park:type

[Jmapb]

On 4/26/2019 9:49 PM, OSM Volunteer stevea wrote:

Other than that I can't think of any tags that would be applicable to
these sorts of situations. We tend to tag the regulations themselves,
not the extent to which they're adhered to. Certainly just calling it a
park because kids play there doesn't seem consistent with OSM standards.
We don't raise the speed limit in places where everyone speeds, or tag
bicycle=yes on ways where they're prohibited but frequently used.



No, I think leisure=playground aligns a bit more closely with "kids play here," 
though some people like snap-tight definitions, others consider things as much more 
elastic.  It's difficult to please everybody; semantics can be messy.


Certainly. But speaking as a map user, if I saw a playground on a map
and then arrived there and found it was just an empty lot or an
undeveloped bit of land, I would find fault with that map. So if these
places (kids play here but it's unofficial) are to be mapped, I'd
suggest different tagging.

If recreation really is the primary human activity in these areas, you
might consider landuse=recreation_ground -- though the way I read the
wiki, it sounds like the intended use is a little more formal than the
situations you're describing.

J


___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

Re: [Talk-us] Parks in the USA, leisure=park, park:type

[Mateusz Konieczny]

24 Apr 2019, 23:05 by kevin.b.ke...@gmail.com:

> TL;DR - Tag the land use, not the land ownership. A city, town,
> county, or state park may be virtually indistinguishable urban green
> spots, recreation grounds, nature reserves, whatever. The level of
> government that manages them may be of interest and worth tagging, but
> ought not to be the primary determinant of 'park type'.
>
I fully agree - who owns objects is not changing its type.
Especially for parks - it does not matte whatever it is owned by
government, company or a single person.

> I think that the Wiki definition leaves a lot to be desired, and I'm
> groping in a fog, much as you are, so please don't take anything that
> I say here as a confrontational pronouncement.
>
It is one of things that seems easy to define until one actually attempts to do 
it.
Further help is welcomed!

> (...)
> All of these features make for what is essentially a human landscape.
> It's one that's designed to be relaxed, focused on being a respite
> from the hurly-burly of the city, but it's still relatively densely
> developed - with many users concentrated in a relatively small area -
> and definitely human-sculpted.
>
I agree, and I really like term "human-sculpted".

> The 'type' of park ought to be "what type of experience ought the
> visitor to expect" and not "what government manages it."
>
Again, I fully agree.

> Bethpage State Park > https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6447778 
> >  is
> a golf course. Robert Moses State Park
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6442393 
> >  is a swimming beach. I
> see no reason to map them as anything but what they are, except to
> inform the user that they're state-owned and run by OPRHP (the Office
> of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation).
>
Yes, "park" in the name does not mean that it is leisure=park.

And some leisure=park may not have "park" in the name (not sure how
often it happens in USA).

We have also things called "industrial park" or "business park"
that are also not tagged leisure=park.
___
Talk-us mailing list
Talk-us@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us