Right, Martin; thanks. Joseph and I discussed off-list there is some conflation of tags from hazard=* which intersect well with at least one or two existing military=* tag values. So, yes, there is some overlap with existing tag (natural=cliff, too).
I have read our hazard wiki (thanks for the ref) and also mentioned to Joseph that hazard=* seems (in addition to being 12 years old and ripe for an update) a bit too much "car and driver" oriented. For example, if a sign warns of "moose crossing" or "children often play near this roadway here" OK, put that sign on a node onto or next to the highway. In addition to chasm going away, radioactive hazards (there's ionizing radiation, RF energy...) and that there are even places where you wouldn't want to be standing during a thunderstorm as they are struck by lightning repeatedly (yes, really: seems there might be one or two in Texas and Canada) there are really verifiable "hazard=yes" places (that are not subjective and quite verifiable) where a node and a brief mention might be a real thing we could very well want to add to our map. Nudge forward, I don't have massive passion or energy to go much further with it, next up, please! (Yeah). What a great project, OSM. (I truly mean that). SteveA _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
