LM_1 <flukas.robot+osm@...> writes: > 2012/3/11 Johan Jönsson <johan.j <at> goteborg.cc>: > > leisure=bandstand is a good tag. > > The bandstand is a prominent feature that is easy to map, so ease of mapping > > with one tag is prefect. > > Is this not bad, having more (independent) information in one tag? Imagine that > person A - technocratic deaf engineer who hates music > and > person B - artist who loves music and does not care a bit whether it > is inside or outside or anything about buildings. > Both happen to be mappers: on cannot input the interesting > construction without adding info about music, the other cannot enter > music without construction. That is the same reasons that I find this a good tag, whether you are type a or type b, you will know it is a bandstand and tag it with that. Easy.
The type a-mapper could add more tags regarding architectural style, the type b-mapper could add more tags regarding music-style. If they do not want or know anything more, the tag bandstand is enough. If per chance they do not know it is called a bandstand I guess there are no problems if they map it with pavilion or music_venue /Johan Jönsson p.s. (As a generalist I would of course prefer if there where a tagging scheme for all pavilions and music_venues out there. building=pavilion pavilion=bandstand and music_venue=open-air_scene, music_venue:size=small or something like that) d.s. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
