> "playground=ride / Is it supposed to include also coin operated ones
that make noise/lights/movements?"
There is already "attraction=kiddie_ride" for them. This are different
types of devices, which are also usually not part of playgrounds.
> "playground=hammock / These are also placed independently from
playgrounds. Maybe have single tag for both?"
Good idea – TagInfo knows 76x leisure=hammock, but I think we should use
this tagging only outside of playgrounds (since hammocks on playgrounds
are for a specific target group / accordingly sized / not for public use
in the stricter sense). I added a reference to this tagging in the
proposal: "For public hammocks in general that are not part of
playgrounds resp. intended for this specific target group, there is
leisure=hammock in use."
> "playground=artwork / playground=steps / why not use regular step
tagging?"
If an object is part of the playground design and provides a
"play"/playground function, then it should also be identifiable and
evaluable via the playground namespace. Otherwise, for example, the
stairs of the path network on a playground could no longer be
distinguished from those that are part of a structure (which makes data
evaluations impossible for this devices/values).
"artwork" is certainly an edge case here, but this value refers
primarily to (sometimes very small, discrete) decorative playground
elements, most of which I would not wish to spam the tourism=artwork
namespace. (The sample picture in the proposal is a very "significant"
one compared to what else is out there.) Maybe they don't even fit the
broader definition of "tourism=artwork" because of it's limited public
usability ("A tag for public pieces of art; typically being staged in
the physical public domain, usually outside and accessible to all." –
see also hammock example)
What do you think?
Am 27.05.23 um 10:25 schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging:
playground=ride
Is it supposed to include also coin operated ones that make
noise/lights/movements?
https://www.google.pl/maps/@50.054966,19.8545417,3a,15.3y,207.67h,84.22t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sHED2kF0PByYJyi9CYVjXXw!2e0!5s20110801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu
caught one
re: playground=hammock
These are also placed independently from playgrounds. Maybe have single tag for
both?
re: playground=artwork
why not just normal artwork tagging?
"If it has a significant art relevance, consider also adding tourism=artwork. "
Note that vast majority of tourism=artwork has no art relevance and definitely
no
significant art relevance
re: playground=steps
why not use regular step tagging?
(the same goes for some other tags)
May 27, 2023, 08:46 bysupap...@riseup.net:
Hi all,
anyone who maps playground equipment from time to time might be familiar
with the issue: The playground values from the wiki represent only a small
range of possible playground devices, for many others you have to get
creative, come up with your own tags or dig through TagInfo to see how
other mappers might have mapped a device.
As a group of mappers who regularly map playgrounds, we are proposing more values to the list of documented playground equipment to better map typical devices that had no documented value before.
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Extended_playground_equipment
Please discuss this proposal on its Wiki Talk page.
Best,
Alex for the group of proposal authors
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
