Re: [Tagging] Defining the meaning of capacity tag for tourism=camp_site
On Sat, 31 Oct 2020 at 20:27, Sven Geggus wrote: > While the wiki clearly states that capacity means people a lot of mappers > seem to think that the number of camp-pitches is meant. > > The problem is, that both numbers seem to make sense on different types of > camp-sites. While the (maximum) Number of people is interesting on > group-only, scout and backcountry sites, there is no such thing on > camping/caravaning sites at all. > > In the latter case we are typically talking about the maximum number of > tents > and caravans while the number of people using the site is usually not > limited. > > As a response to my diary Entry Lyx suggestest two new tags: > > We already have "maxtents" and we could simply add "maxcaravans" and > "maxvisitors" deprecating capacity in case of camp-sites. > > Similar in spirit would be deprecating "maxtents" unsing "capacity:tents", > "capacity:caravans" and "capacity:visitors" in future. > Sorry to be a bit late responding here but I'm just catching up after a week away, spent camping in our caravan! :-) The camping / caravan ground we went to is 60 acres / 24 hectares in area. Most of it is available for set-up-anywhere-you-like camping in tent / camper-trailer / caravan / whatever, with no provision for power or water to the individual site (pitch). Over in one corner, there are also 30 powered sites (pitches). Of these, 2 are reserved for tents, 2 for motorhomes / 5th-wheel (very large!) caravans, & the other 26 for normal caravans / camper trailers. All of these powered sites have an allowed capacity of 6 people only, which means one "caravan", plus possibly a tent, on each site. The park overall also has a max. capacity of 1000 people. So how do we tag it? Thanks Graeme ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Fire lookouts
On 11/10/20 2:16 PM, Jake Low wrote: > This proposal suggests introducing two new tag values: building=fire_lookout > to indicate that a building is or was originally built to be a fire lookout, > and emergency=fire_lookout to indicate that a feature (usually a building=* > or man_made=tower) is used for fire spotting. Fire lookouts towers are unfortunately being shut down all over the place these days. But this brings up an interesting point. Many rural fire departments have "lookout locations", often used for smoke sightings. We have several in my district that get used heavily, never though about tagging them as anything but a nice view. Basically these are high places you can get to easily and get clear compass bearings on the smoke plume. We get many smoke sightings from illegal campfires, so use these locations frequently. When you're driving around in the forest, you can't see anything, so two bearings lets us triangulate a rough GPS location, and have everyone go there. I don't have a suggestion on tagging, sorry, but sometimes these locations have parking, sometimes it's a short hike uphill. So consider something more flexible. - rob - -- Senior Tech Lead Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team https://www.hotosm.org ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Fire lookouts
Proposal page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/fire_lookouts Fire lookouts are structures used by firefighting personnel to spot wildfires and monitor them as they develop. Lookouts are usually built on high vantage points in the wilderness, and staff often live on site during the fire season. This proposal suggests introducing two new tag values: building=fire_lookout to indicate that a building is or was originally built to be a fire lookout, and emergency=fire_lookout to indicate that a feature (usually a building=* or man_made=tower) is used for fire spotting. Note that fire lookouts are sometimes but not always towers, and thus a new tower:type=fire_lookout tag wouldn't be an appropriate way to map them. Additionally, some lookout structures are historic and no longer used for fire spotting, and some non-lookout structures are used for fire spotting (such as towers), hence the need for two tags. This is my first OSM proposal. I'm excited to hear your feedback! -Jake ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Deprecate water=pond?
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 at 05:26, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: > I think the best option is to deprecate water=pond and suggest using > water=lake for > natural lakes, even small ones, and use water=reservoir or water=basin (or > landuse=reservoir or =basin if you prefer) for the artificial ones. I have a pond in my garden. I could, if I had a mind to and a decent run up, jump over it. Not by any stretch of the imagination is it a lake, reservoir or basin. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Deprecate water=pond?
Agreed: it is often not possible to tell if a pond/lake is artificial or not.
Some lakes are hundreds of years old and the environment has adapted to now
appear as though it were a natural feature.
Reservoir does not seem appropriate for an artificial pond. In my experience,
reservoirs are large and tend to store water for either consumption or to
generate power. Ponds can range from something in one’s back garden, to
substantial bodies of water in parks and nature reserves. Basin doesn’t seem to
fit with these either (they appear to be more for temporary storage of water?).
It seems that requiring “lake” to be natural is the issue. Lakes can be both
natural and artificially made. If we could tag “ponds” as “lakes” and then add
a tag “lake=pond” that would allow some freedom for the mapper. However, it
appears that there is a willingness to separate “natural” and “artificial”/”man
made” features.
Best.
From: Peter Elderson
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 7:49 AM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Deprecate water=pond?
The problem is that natural and artificial are not neatly separated IRL. In
Nederland, nature is neatly cut, shaven and shaped. Currently, natural style is
preferred. "New nature" is the hype, where heavy machinery creates new
landscapes including ponds, lakes, streams and wetlands. Sea dykes are shaped
like dunes. Etc. So every pond is made to look natural, and every lake is
reshaped and maintained.
We have words for pond ("vijver") and lake ("meer") but very loosely defined,
and many more terms for other bodies of water.
I think a clearcut definition would not help at all in this case.
Peter Elderson
Op 10 nov. 2020 om 06:30 heeft Joseph Eisenberg
mailto:joseph.eisenb...@gmail.com>> het volgende
geschreven:
The tag water=pond was added with a large number of other types of "water=*" in
2011, but it has a poorly defined description.
"A pond: a body of standing water, man-made
in most cases, that is usually smaller than a lake. Salt evaporation ponds
should be tagged with
landuse=salt_pond,
open-air swimming pools — with
leisure=swimming_pool."
So it might be artificial, like a landuse=reservoir or water=reservoir, but
smallish. Or it might be natural like a water=lake, but smallish. However,
nothing on the water=lake page defines a lower limit for the size of a lake.
This is a shame, because all the other values of water=* are clearly defined as
only natural, or only artificial, and waterway=* features are also clearly
divided. Furthermore, the original lags landuse=reservoir and landuse=basin
were also clearly artificial, while lakes were natural.
But the biggest problem is that there is no way to define a lower size for a
lake or reservoir, or an upper size for a pond. And the size of the area is
easier available from the geometry of the feature, so it doesn't need to be
mentioned in the tag.
I think the best option is to deprecate water=pond and suggest using water=lake
for natural lakes, even small ones, and use water=reservoir or water=basin (or
landuse=reservoir or =basin if you prefer) for the artificial ones.
-- Joseph Eisenberg
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
