It looks like you're referring to this area: https://www.openstreetmap.org/query?lat=40.3482&lon=46.5377#map=10/40.3812/46.8347
It seems that this giant border-area polygon was removed recently as it's only rendered at lower zoom levels. If the precedent is that military conflict areas are mapped with landuse=military and possibly also military=danger_area, then it doesn't sound like there is a need for an additional hazard tag, unless we think that the type of danger_area needs to be further described by the addition of a hazard tag. There does not seem to be any existing usages of the hazard key that I can find for an active military conflict zone, other than hazard=minefield. On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:28 AM Andy Townsend <ajt1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 27/11/2020 04:25, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote: > > Assuming that the boundary of that area is reasonably permanent, my first > reaction is that this could be described by military=danger_area. However, > that tag requires landuse=military as the primary tag, which probably isn't > correct here. > > On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 10:59 PM Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Not wanting to create a bunfight, but just reading the news, & wondering >> if this sort of thing should be tagged as a hazardous area? >> >> >> https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-27/ethiopia-to-launch-final-phase-of-offensive-in-tigray-region/12926606 >> >> > Yes, there are precedents for having that sort of thing in OSM as military > areas of some sort - have a look at how the frontline in the recent > Azerbaijan / Armenia conflict was mapped over the last few months. > > Best Regards, > > Andy > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
