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.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging