Re: [Tagging] Playground tag proposal - voting
I've used 'smell' on the proposal; I think more people will know that word! As an aside, there's a playground viewer app here: http://ant.homelinux.net/maps/index.html which shows (as blue icons) any playgrounds created with the new schema. It's experimental at the moment, working with a snapshot of planet from last week. It runs on my mighty 400MHz Via C3 box, so occasionally the database server runs out of steam, especially when viewing large areas - be patient! username/passwd for that page is map/mrmappy I notice that there are a few playgrounds with the new schema popping up; I think this will become a really useful resource for parents, given a little time and a bit more coding. All the best, Antony. On 16 May 2010 02:46, Bill Ricker wrote: > re sensory=? to smell? > Perhaps the word you want is Olfactory ? > > -- > Bill > n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Playground tag proposal - voting
re sensory=? to smell? Perhaps the word you want is Olfactory ? -- Bill n1...@arrl.net bill.n1...@gmail.com ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Playground tag proposal - voting
My view was that baby=yes was shorthand for minage=0, maxage=about 4 - more a recommendation of age appropriateness than a hard limit. Also it was intended for the equipment rather than the whole play area - though in the unlikely case of an entire play area being for babies there wouldn't be any reason not to apply it to the whole area. Swings are the most common case, though there are baby slides and roundabouts near us as well. I suppose what makes it for babies is that there is some postural support, or some form of restraint for small children who don't have the sense not to stand up and wander off while they are (say) at the highest point on a swing! The age is inexact, which makes it hard to specify. Or the equipment is very small, such that a fall from the top of it wouldn't damage a very young child. minage and maxage are in fairly common usage which is why I put them on the proposal - to cover the cases where the operators of the play area give a specific age/height range. Antony. On 14 May 2010 20:10, John Smith wrote: > On 15 May 2010 04:37, Erik Johansson wrote: >> Sure, I only want to use baby=yes to tag if there is toys for babies. >> This is mostly used for swings so I'm not entirely sure it's needed. >> :-) > > There could be an exclusive area for toddlers, another for children > and so on, imho instead of saying babies, put age in years, eg 0-0.5 > or 0.5 to 2 or 2 to 7 etc... > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Playground tag proposal - voting
On 15 May 2010 04:37, Erik Johansson wrote: > Sure, I only want to use baby=yes to tag if there is toys for babies. > This is mostly used for swings so I'm not entirely sure it's needed. > :-) There could be an exclusive area for toddlers, another for children and so on, imho instead of saying babies, put age in years, eg 0-0.5 or 0.5 to 2 or 2 to 7 etc... ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Playground tag proposal - voting
On 15 May 2010 04:42, John Smith wrote: > On 15 May 2010 04:23, Phil! Gold wrote: >> Could that be unified with other access designations? 'baby=designated' >> or 'baby=official'? > > It might be confusing to tag something arbitary as baby, wouldn't it > be better to tag age appropriateness? and height appropriateness for > that matter. > > For example I often see playgrounds tagged 0-7 years, or 100-200cm or > 120+ cm tall etc... > age:min=0 age:max=7 height:min=1.2 height:max=2 etc... ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Playground tag proposal - voting
On 15 May 2010 04:23, Phil! Gold wrote: > Could that be unified with other access designations? 'baby=designated' > or 'baby=official'? It might be confusing to tag something arbitary as baby, wouldn't it be better to tag age appropriateness? and height appropriateness for that matter. For example I often see playgrounds tagged 0-7 years, or 100-200cm or 120+ cm tall etc... ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Playground tag proposal - voting
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 8:23 PM, Phil! Gold wrote: > * Erik Johansson [2010-05-14 18:29 +0200]: >> If you tag highway=footway with bike=yes then you don't make it >> exclusively for bikes. So if you tag a playground with baby=yes >> shouldn't that just mean that there are some baby specific toys there, >> and baby=no that there aren't any big structures for babies. >> >> Perhaps adding a baby=exclusive? > > Could that be unified with other access designations? 'baby=designated' > or 'baby=official'? Sure, I only want to use baby=yes to tag if there is toys for babies. This is mostly used for swings so I'm not entirely sure it's needed. :-) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Playground tag proposal - voting
* Erik Johansson [2010-05-14 18:29 +0200]: > If you tag highway=footway with bike=yes then you don't make it > exclusively for bikes. So if you tag a playground with baby=yes > shouldn't that just mean that there are some baby specific toys there, > and baby=no that there aren't any big structures for babies. > > Perhaps adding a baby=exclusive? Could that be unified with other access designations? 'baby=designated' or 'baby=official'? -- ...computer contrarian of the first order... / http://aperiodic.net/phil/ PGP: 026A27F2 print: D200 5BDB FC4B B24A 9248 9F7A 4322 2D22 026A 27F2 --- -- I seem to be having tremendous difficulty with my lifestyle. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Playground tag proposal - voting
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 12:02 AM, antony.king wrote: > Hi all, > > We've been slowly mulling over the proposed playground extensions for > the last couple of months, And you did a very good job, I've always wondered what to call those hanging roundabouts myself. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Playground tag proposal - voting
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 12:02 AM, antony.king wrote: > Hi all, > > We've been slowly mulling over the proposed playground extensions for > the last couple of months, and I hope that we've covered all the > ground that needs to be covered by now. Could those that care to vote, > cast your votes on the page? If you disapprove, please say why and > maybe we can continue the RFC stage for a little longer so as to get > it right. I'm aware that there are a few people who have had input on > this who disapprove of the whole voting concept; I'm not proposing we > open that can of worms here but I am keen to formalise this properly. > > Here's the page: > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Playground_Equipment > > Regards, If you tag highway=footway with bike=yes then you don't make it exclusively for bikes. So if you tag a playground with baby=yes shouldn't that just mean that there are some baby specific toys there, and baby=no that there aren't any big structures for babies. Perhaps adding a baby=exclusive? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Playground tag proposal - voting
Hi all, We've been slowly mulling over the proposed playground extensions for the last couple of months, and I hope that we've covered all the ground that needs to be covered by now. Could those that care to vote, cast your votes on the page? If you disapprove, please say why and maybe we can continue the RFC stage for a little longer so as to get it right. I'm aware that there are a few people who have had input on this who disapprove of the whole voting concept; I'm not proposing we open that can of worms here but I am keen to formalise this properly. Here's the page: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Playground_Equipment Regards, Antony. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
