On 24/09/19 20:56, Andrew Davidson wrote:
On 24/9/19 10:56 am, Daniel Graus wrote:
Should all botanical gardens be changed to match one another? Is
leisure=park or leisure=garden more correct in some/the majority/all
of these cases?
OK, a quick global survey....
Of the ~2,500 botanical gardens that are in Wikidata and have a match
in OSM there are:
320 leisure=garden
204 leisure=park
22 tourism=attraction
20 tourism=zoo
12 leisure=nature_reserve
11 tourism=museum
4 tourism=theme_park
1 tourism=botanical_garden
1 leisure=yes
and 47 with no apparent object tag.
Wikidata lists 37 botanical gardens in Australia that don't have a
wikidata tag or aren't mapped. Will have to check these before we can
get an Australian list.
There are some ~700 garden:type=botanical in the OSM data base of some
~57,000 garden:type=*.
Most, ~ 56,000 are garden:type=residential, with botanical being second
most frequent.
I don't think the most frequent use in the data base should override a
logical tagging system, rather the reverse. A logical tagging system is
far easier to learn and retain in memory rather then an an illogical one.
-------------------------------------
Mapping missing botanic gardens would be worthwhile. They can be
interesting places to visit, certainly worth a lunch stop.
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
