> How should the following scenario be tagged: > Playground https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/320398422 just has one equipment > (sandpit) and this equipment (sandpit) fills up the whole area of the > playground.
> The tagging used here is as follow: >(access=yes) reluctant for our purpose >leisure=playground >playground=sandpit This looks fine. The whole playgorund is just the sandpit, so using the same area for both is not too bad. And the area is about 10 x 10 meters, so it isn't tiny. I also think it would be fine to just use playground=sandpit alone, in this case, and especially for a smaller sandpit. -- Joseph Eisenberg On 4/13/20, Sören Reinecke via Tagging <tagging@openstreetmap.org> wrote: > Due to your feedback I will cancel the proposal. AGAIN: What you say is > 100% correct. This proposal's purpose was just to simplify what seems > unclear to many (not all) mappers. > > But keep you eyes on the following unsolved scenario: > --- > How should the following scenario be tagged: > Playground https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/320398422 just has one > equipment (sandpit) and this equipment (sandpit) fills up the whole > area of the playground. The tagging used here is as follow: > (access=yes) reluctant for our purpose > leisure=playground > playground=sandpit > > Helpful resources: > https://wiki.osm.org/Key:playground: > https://wiki.osm.org/Key:playground > --- > > Summary about what you said about this case: >> Re: > This would allow to map playgrounds and their equipment in > situations where a playground just has one equipment and this > equipment fills up the whole area of the playground. > >> Mappers can tag "leisure=playground" + "playground=structure" on the > same node or area in this case, right? > > > My answer: > The Wikipage for "Key:playground" says the following: "It > should be > tagged to separate objects within the area of a playground". An > exception is given with "Only when the position of the individual > objects cannot be mapped yet" at the really end of the page. But for > such cases where we cannot map playground equipment as an extra object > we have the Key:playground:* . > >> Well the equipment in this case is playground=sandpit. > As the outline of the sandpit is identical with the outline of the > leisure=playground, why would > this be wrong? > > > My answer: Theoretically you need to create an object for the > playground itself > and another object for the playground equipment. Both then will share > the same geometries (outline). In practical meaning you normally won't > map it this way because it is idiotic. My proposal also reflects that > and provides a way to map such cases without having to do it the > theoretical way. > > > We should clarify how to handle such cases in the wiki > > Cheers > > Sören Reinecke alias Valor Naram > -----Original Message----- > From: Sören Reinecke via Tagging <tagging@openstreetmap.org> > Reply-To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" < > tagging@openstreetmap.org> > To: tagging@openstreetmap.org > Cc: Sören Reinecke <tilmanreine...@yahoo.de> > Subject: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Unifying playground > equipment tagging) > Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 16:43:59 +0200 > > Hey, > a new RFC for > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Unifying-playground-equipment-tagging > > Purpose:Simplified tagging of playground equipment on the playground > itself oras separate object. Both schemes already exist and I want to > combinethem to help to decrease tagging errors. > Proposal:I propose the key playground to be deprecated and the use of > keyplayground:* instead. That would mean that on both playground > andplayground equipment objects in OSM the key playground:* applies. > Thisthen would also allow to map playgrounds and their equipment > insituations where a playground just has one equipment and this > equipmentfills up the whole area of the playground. > > > > What I feel:I know many of you do not want developers to speak about > how you shoulddo things. But I think a dialogue is necessary and also > good for us alland we can learn from each other: Mappers know the > philosophy of OSM,the mapping, tagging and the QA, they know what to > achieve how.Developers know the philosophy of orthogonality and > nornmalisation ofthings and can help mappers to make OSM more useful. > I am the developer of Babykarte. Babykarte follows what I want > topropose for a quite long time already with some extra > specificationswhich enables it to be quite flexible in interpreting the > tagging. Thismakes Babykarte a really good interpreter of the tagging > of playgroundequipment. This is necessary to do for us developers (we > would be happyif all mappers would stick to the specs) because some > mappers decidednot to read the wiki carefully or not at all but instead > to actuallymap without knowing how. So developers always need to do > someinterpreting and thinking of all the possibilities people do not > map inaccordance with the spec. This makes us to create our own spec > thatbuilds on the official one because people aren't following > thecommunity's specs. > > > > _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
