The hazard tagging has a problem, when you try to apply it. A dog hazard is a hazard to people by dogs or is a hazard to dogs by mountain lions or whatever. In a different thread we are discussing dooring hazard. I would love to see a more general approach to hazard and danger tagging, but do not have a proposal ready. I would love to be able to tag hazards of all kinds mainly for cyclists in my case. One of them was hazard by free running dog packs.
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Virus-free. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 13:14, ael <witwa...@disroot.org> wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 03:26:07PM -0700, Tod Fitch wrote: > > dog=yes|no|leashed already exists for a totally different semantic > (letting dog owners know if their pet is allowed). > > > > If this goes forward I would prefer reversing thing and make it > hazard=dog. That would also allow other types of hazards to be mapped. > > > > Checking taginfo it seems hazard=* [1] is in use. Why not go with it? > > You beat me to it. The existing hazard tag is the obvious choice which I > use quite often. Although it does not seem to be well supported by data > consumers. I have used it in Cornwall to flag open mine shafts, and in > one case to warn of dangerous (illegal) dogs on a right of way through a > farmyard. > > ael > > > _______________________________________________ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging >
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
