Proposal talk:Skatepark
Keeping leisure=pitch
For me the initial reaction was "so what is wrong with leisure=pitch + sport=skateboard ?" I would rather say that special tag for ice rink was a mistake and I would consider migrating it to a leisure=pitch (at least initially, by adding leisure=pitch and sport=*) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:30, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- This begs the questions though why not also convert swimming_pool and golf_course to pitch + sport format given they both are "an area designed for practicing a particular sport, normally designated with appropriate markings" --Xmrscott (talk) 04:32, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
- OSM tagging is growing organically, in many cases there are weird exceptions. I would prefer to avoid adding new ones Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:16, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
- +1 of keeping leisure=pitch, avoiding top-level tag fragmentation. Refinements about the sport definition can appear in the sport=* subtagging.--Polarbear w (talk) 17:26, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- These concerns about fragmentation are unfounded for me. Do you think the same about places where food is served? Should we have a single tag and then do everything with cuisine=*? sorcrosc (talk) 00:10, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- Yes I prefer the same for food. I prefer amenity=restaurant + cuisine=italian or cuisine=chinese over amenity=italian_restaurant or amenity=chinese_restaurant.--Polarbear w (talk) 00:52, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- These concerns about fragmentation are unfounded for me. Do you think the same about places where food is served? Should we have a single tag and then do everything with cuisine=*? sorcrosc (talk) 00:10, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Fragmentation?
When is there more fragmentation in tagging and who really experience fragmentation? The proposal lists several sports related to a skatepark, hence the sport=* tag take many values considering the multiple possible combinations. According to the method with leisure=pitch (or other "multi purpose" main tag), a data consumer must face very disperse tagging and guess what kind of combination of sports represent a skatepark. Do we really want this constraint on the main tag? sorcrosc (talk) 21:51, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Depends on the intention of the data consumer, they are quite different. The map style which wants to paint all sports facilities of the town in olive-green is happy with an unfragmented high-level tag. A search tool for skating facilities will more likely look into the sport=* tagging. If you want to develop specific details for a particular sport, have a look how it is done for Climbing, which has lots of varieties and is independent from the physical tag. --Polarbear w (talk) 10:49, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
vote?
Are you planning to start a vote? See Proposal_process#Voting for help how to do that Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:23, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Equipment tagging differs from usual schemes
The proposed tagging of individual installations (e.g. skatepark:halfpipe=yes) differs from the pattern that is already common in OSM, e.g. for playgrounds or fitness equipment. Something like skatepark=halfpipe would be better. skatepark:obstacles is already in use, but only very rarely.--Supaplex030 (talk) 19:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- No, skatepark:*=* is used on a leisure=skatepark to show what facilities it has, as in toilets=yes. playground=* is used on individual pieces of equipment. --- Kovposch (talk) 07:06, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- OK, in this case you are right. I was referring to separately mapped installations.--Supaplex030 (talk) 09:30, 25 May 2022 (UTC)