While hazard=yes is certainly in use (like barrier=yes and even amenity=yes), it shouldn't be included in the proposal.
In every case it will be more helpful if users make up a new tag. If there is a sign warning of monkeys which are prone to steal tourist's purses, then hazard=purse_pilfering_primates is better than hazard=yes, since it immediately make it possible for other mappers and database users to get some idea about the kind of hazard. The current mention of hazard=yes in addition to another main tag, like man_made=adit + hazard=yes, is not terrible, though man_made=adit + hazard=collapse or hazard=toxic_air would be clearer - it's not always obvious which kind of hazard to expect. -- Joseph Eisenberg On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 12:38 PM Brian M. Sperlongano <zelonew...@gmail.com> wrote: > There's a few usages of hazard=golf_balls, which is more like what you're > describing and actually a hazard. It seems a bit nebulous, but perhaps the > sign could be mapped. That's different from a golf crossing, which is a > place where golfers and golf carts would cross a road. > > I've already added hazard=low_flying_aircraft as was previously suggested. > > And with regard to the generic hazard sign, there is always the generic > catch-all of hazard=yes! > > Thanks for the link to the directory of German signs. I think most of > them are covered, though there's a few outliers. I'm trying to err on the > side of defining fewer values to make sure that we don't end up duplicating > something that exists elsewhere (for example, in the cases of > highway=crossing and traffic_calming=* which are both often signed as > hazards). Essentially my net is "values that have high existing usage plus > values that people feel strongly about including". > > > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 2:56 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> sent from a phone >> >> > On 4. Dec 2020, at 17:42, Brian M. Sperlongano <zelonew...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > I am thinking this case (crossing golfers) is more of a >> highway=crossing rather than a hazard? >> >> >> I think it is a warning that a golf ball might eventually hit your >> vehicle, and if you’re prepared you won’t be startled >> >> There is also the crossing airplane hazard, even 2 variants, airplanes >> from the right: >> >> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_101-10_-_Flugbetrieb,_Aufstellung_rechts,_StVO_2017.svg >> and from the left: >> >> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_101-20_-_Flugbetrieb,_Aufstellung_links,_StVO_2017.svg >> >> They do not imply that you have to fear airplanes on the street, they >> are meant to prepare you for low flying aircraft. >> >> A picture list of all German "standard hazards" can be found here: >> >> https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bildtafel_der_Verkehrszeichen_in_der_Bundesrepublik_Deutschland_seit_2017#Gefahrzeichen_nach_Anlage_1_(zu_%C2%A7_40_Absatz_6_und_7_StVO) >> but with this sign >> >> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_101_-_Gefahrstelle,_StVO_1970.svg >> in combination with a text sign, any hazard can be signposted. >> >> These are only the official road signs, on footways and private >> properties, information signs etc., you might find all kind of other >> hazard warnings. Is the tag only thought for roads and official road >> signs, or is its scope extended to other official signs (e.g. in some >> forests, there are "Rabies prone area" official signs, military areas >> might warn with "restricted area, armed guards", and a property owner >> might allude their dog is snappish. >> >> Cheers >> Martin >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
