Talk:Key:balloon:height

altitude

Wouldn't balloon:altitude=* or altitude=* be more appropriate keys for that information, would they? --Chris2map (talk) 13:28, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Probably, I'm not a native speaker, but they are : "The balloon even went higher than the record-breaking height..." https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20230210-what-it-takes-to-build-a-balloon-for-100000ft, "the height above sea level" https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/altitude. You'd first need to calculate in case of 150m (above ground) balloons https://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=%22balloon%3Atours%22%3D*+global&R, the same for other balloon:type=tethered. attraction=balloon_ride operators talk about "3000m" but don't mention "above sea level". balloon:ele=stratosphere would also be a bit strange. I'm not sure with what "altitude" might be confused, but I think "height" is understood by everyone (and "ele" for "exact height above sea level"). Wouldn't make up a third one without a good reason (suing the operator if 3000 isn't reached ?) Rtfm (talk) 03:22, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the research! Personally, I have the problem of understanding that with balloon:height I first understand the size of the balloon. My personal understanding is: "height" = how tall an object is. If "altitude" is to fix with "above sea level" or to confusing with "ele", I would alternatively go with e.g. height:operating=* or height:operational=*. --Chris2map (talk) 09:03, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

If you find a majority which opts for a "third" vale such as balloon:altitude (for which reason ever), I'm fine with it. But you should explain what it might be good for. Generally, I'm a friend of the KISS_principle. Rtfm (talk) 02:09, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Found a balloon (attraction) which was quite high ;-) https://imgdrop.io/image/2N3LT. Wonder how that looked like in a flight simulator.Rtfm (talk) 00:17, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Why a namespace. What does "height" mean.

"Those who keep order are just too lazy to search", but structure eases the overview. Examples :

• aeroway:*=* - namespace prefix (what are we talking about)
• balloon:*=* - namespace prefix
• tower:*=* - namespace prefix
• *:repair=* - Suffix. The prefix defines which object is repaired (and the value what exactly, might be just "service")

This is also called a syntax, means how language is structured. A common way within OSM is the namespace.

e.g. balloon:height=* describes what we're talking about and which value is given for this object. It indicates the height above ground, similar to buildings. The exact height makes no sense as it's dependent on wind (especially in case of tethered balloons) as well as from other atmospheric conditions. There are only three "main heights" : tethered (~150m), leisure launches (~3000m) and high altitude launches (stratosphere). For anything in between, the approximate number may be provided.

The "height" of the balloon itself varies depending on the fill level.

Rtfm (talk) 18:15, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

The syntax or namespacing is not the question. You could apply your explanation also on "height" and "height:*" (We are talking about heights, the "height" of a physical object, and the "height:operational" of a feature.) In case of "height" vs. "altitude" or something else it is fine to keep with "balloon:*". I think "balloon:height" is acceptable. Just wanted to think over again if there might be an even better term, due to misunderstanding "balloon:height" at the first moment. But since e.g. "*:altitude" raises different confusion regarding above sea level or ground, it possibly is no better alternative and the pros and cons are balanced among them. --Chris2map (talk) 17:04, 4 April 2025 (UTC)