Re: [Tagging] Benches and hostile architecture
Ok, I will use that with the tag for the physical obstructions.
Thanks all for the discussion
August 24, 2020 7:07:08 PM CEST Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
RE: "Would something like hindrance:target = lying_down or hindrance:target =
sitting be more clear?"
While this is somewhat less ambiguous, it looks and sounds quite strange in
English, and it's quite long.
How about "lying_down=obstructed", "sitting=obstructed", "skating=obstructed"
or something like that?
I also think it would be a good idea to tag the physical obstructions, like
width=, length=, slope=, arm_rests=, spikes=, skatestoppers=, etc, as others
have mentioned.
– Joseph Eisenberg
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 6:46 AM Vucod via Tagging
wrote:
>
> Just to clarify an important point. The hostile_architecture key was
> suggested as a main/category tag to go along with specific keys
> (lying_hindrance, sitting_hindrance).
> Used alone, I agree that it would be very vague and could be difficult to
> verify. I would say to only use it in combination with specific keys but I
> don't know how this would be followed by mappers...
>
> On the specific tags:
>
> @Josepth Eisenberg(mail below):
>
> As others have said, no_* and *=prohibited loose the notion of hindrance that
> is crucial if we want to map physical and visible things. Would something
> like hindrance:target = lying_down or hindrance:target = sitting be more
> clear? And yes, the goal is to make clear that {lying|sitting|...} is
> physically obstructed (no relation to legal usage).
>
> @Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
> "what about benches being completely removed (or never installed), it’s
> equally hostile but not mappable. Or shops who are right away not built in a
> way that you could sit down on their facade."
>
> With tags like lying_hindrance and sitting_hindrance, we don't look for the
> intentions of the builders but we just look for these hindrances. So, we
> would not map your examples.
>
> "quite common in Rome are inside corners of buildings filled with masonry
> (typically up to 1,5m) so people do not urinate (not a recent feature, most
> look as if they were hundreds of years old). And in this case, it’s also
> probably more beneficial than hostile in the general perception. At least I
> guess many of us would deny a right of public urination in the city?"
>
> Yes with the term "hostile", an opinion could be seen behind it but the term
> "hostile architecture" refers to the enforcement/prevention of some
> behaviors whether it is good or not. In German and French, they use defensive
> architecture/ defensive urban design where it is less opinionated.
>
> @Mateusz Konieczny : ""length was refused as an official key for bench" Why?
> Is there some valid reason, or maybe it was part of proposal that failed for
> other reasons."
>
> length and width keys on benches were refused because they judged that it was
> going too much into details
> (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Attributes)
>
>
> On the generic tag:
>
> As info:
>
> - "Hostile architecture", a Wikipédia article, a subreddit and 150 000 google
> results
> - "Hostile design", 20 000 google results
>
> Vucod
>
> August 23, 2020 10:22:38 PM CEST Joseph Eisenberg
> wrote:
>
> The term "hostile architecture" is too vague. As an alternative
> "anti-homeless" is also not precise enough. We are getting closer with the
> initial suggestion that the feature is to prevent lying down, sleeping or
> sitting.
>
> However, I think the tags "sitting_hindrance=" and "lying_hindrance" are not
> clear enough in English. The term "lying" is ambiguous, since it can refer to
> "telling lies" (falsehoods) as well. Also, in English syntax it sounds
> strange to say something is a "lying hindrance", because this would normally
> be an obstacle which is lying down, rather than a hindrance to a person lying
> down.
>
> So it would be better to change the order of words in the tags, e.g.
> "no_lying=" and "no_sitting=" , or just simplify to "sitting=prohibited" and
> "lying_down=prohibited" or similar. But I admit that none of those options
> are perfectly clear. Perhaps someone else has a better phrase?
>
>
> We want to make it clear that lying down or sitting down is not allowed or
> physical obstructed, right?
>
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 10:38 AM Paul Allen wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 18:22, Oliver Simmons wrote:
> >
> >> Someone else can p
Re: [Tagging] Benches and hostile architecture
Just to clarify an important point. The hostile_architecture key was suggested
as a main/category tag to go along with specific keys (lying_hindrance,
sitting_hindrance).
Used alone, I agree that it would be very vague and could be difficult to
verify. I would say to only use it in combination with specific keys but I
don't know how this would be followed by mappers...
On the specific tags:
@Josepth Eisenberg(mail below):
As others have said, no_* and *=prohibited loose the notion of hindrance that
is crucial if we want to map physical and visible things. Would something like
hindrance:target = lying_down or hindrance:target = sitting be more clear? And
yes, the goal is to make clear that {lying|sitting|...} is physically
obstructed (no relation to legal usage).
@Martin Koppenhoefer :
"what about benches being completely removed (or never installed), it’s equally
hostile but not mappable. Or shops who are right away not built in a way that
you could sit down on their facade."
With tags like lying_hindrance and sitting_hindrance, we don't look for the
intentions of the builders but we just look for these hindrances. So, we would
not map your examples.
"quite common in Rome are inside corners of buildings filled with masonry
(typically up to 1,5m) so people do not urinate (not a recent feature, most
look as if they were hundreds of years old). And in this case, it’s also
probably more beneficial than hostile in the general perception. At least I
guess many of us would deny a right of public urination in the city?"
Yes with the term "hostile", an opinion could be seen behind it but the term
"hostile architecture" refers to the enforcement/prevention of some
behaviors whether it is good or not. In German and French, they use defensive
architecture/ defensive urban design where it is less opinionated.
@Mateusz Konieczny : ""length was refused as an official key for bench" Why? Is
there some valid reason, or maybe it was part of proposal that failed for other
reasons."
length and width keys on benches were refused because they judged that it was
going too much into details
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Attributes)
On the generic tag:
As info:
- "Hostile architecture", a Wikipédia article, a subreddit and 150 000 google
results
- "Hostile design", 20 000 google results
Vucod
August 23, 2020 10:22:38 PM CEST Joseph Eisenberg
wrote:
The term "hostile architecture" is too vague. As an alternative "anti-homeless"
is also not precise enough. We are getting closer with the initial suggestion
that the feature is to prevent lying down, sleeping or sitting.
However, I think the tags "sitting_hindrance=" and "lying_hindrance" are not
clear enough in English. The term "lying" is ambiguous, since it can refer to
"telling lies" (falsehoods) as well. Also, in English syntax it sounds strange
to say something is a "lying hindrance", because this would normally be an
obstacle which is lying down, rather than a hindrance to a person lying down.
So it would be better to change the order of words in the tags, e.g.
"no_lying=" and "no_sitting=" , or just simplify to "sitting=prohibited" and
"lying_down=prohibited" or similar. But I admit that none of those options are
perfectly clear. Perhaps someone else has a better phrase?
We want to make it clear that lying down or sitting down is not allowed or
physical obstructed, right?
-- Joseph Eisenberg
On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 10:38 AM Paul Allen wrote:
>
> On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 18:22, Oliver Simmons wrote:
>
>> Someone else can probably think of a better suggestion
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture
>
> --
> Paul
>
> ___
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Benches and hostile architecture
Hello,
1) I wish to tag benches that were designed to avoid that someone lie on it.
There has been some related discussions in the past
(https://www.reddit.com/r/openstreetmap/comments/avbmsb/is_there_a_preferred_way_of_mapping_possible/
and
https://www.reddit.com/r/openstreetmap/comments/8rs7zf/how_to_map_antihomeless_bench/
)
but with no conclusion. It is possible that it has retained people to map that
kind of objects. Today, there is nearly no such information in OSM. Maybe it is
because it is not its place? Nobody expressed that clearly.
So, I started to use the tag lying_hindrance=yes on some benches. In case of
doubts, this can be verified when doing surveys, by lying on the bench. This
could also be determined most of the time by looking at a few things. The
length of the bench, the presence of a slope, the presence of separation
between the seats of the bench, and by checking if it is a standing bench. Note
that length was refused as an official key for bench and that the key for the
separation doesn't exist (armrest does not specifically concern the inner part
of the bench). The tag could be extended by specifying the hindrance type:
armrest, standing_bench, short_length, slope, ...
What do you think about this tag? Do you have alternative ideas?
2) Also, I wish to map something else related to hostile architecture. I wish
to map devices that are placed near the entrance of shops to prevent people to
sit there (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGdHfvsCP7A,
https://twitter.com/ArticuleE/status/1222197697333145603,
https://twitter.com/ArticuleE/status/1215931276944924672). I was going to add a
combination of tags on the building where the shop is located:
sitting_hindrance=yes
sitting_hindrance:location=street_side
It can also be verified quite easily. A general tag like
hostile_architecture={sitting_hindrance|lying_hindrance} would also be quite
useful for mappers to rapidly understand the purpose of these tags.
What do you think about it?
Thanks for your time
Vucod___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
