Talk:Key:playground

Sensory values

The sensory tags lack parallelism. If we use visual and tactile, I believe we should use auditory and olfactory. 'Audible' would be more similar to 'visible' and 'touchable' and likewise 'smell' would be consistent with 'sight' and 'touch'. I think the values should be:

• sensory=visual
• sensory=tactile
• sensory=auditory
• sensory=olfactory

Thoughts? Scottyc 20:29, 19 August 2011 (BST)

Professionals tend to agree there are 8 senses. The five primary (touch, taste, hearing, vision, and smell) the other three are vestibular (our sense of balance and movement), proprioception (our sense of where our bodies and limbs are in space), and interoception (our ability to pick up on internal queues such as hunger, pain, emotions, needing to go to the bathroom). These should be the 8 key values more or less. iismitch55 16:20, 20 October 2024 (ET)

Missing equipment

I find I'm missing the following equipment while trying to tag a newly developed playground:

playground=platform (covered=yes)

playground=climbing_pole (or beam)

playground=excavator (metal contraption with seat and two levers that move a sort of shovel)

playground=tree_house (they built as very beautiful tree house around a tree that was already there)

playground=firefighter_pole (height 5m, not for the faint of heart :-)

playground=chain_ladder

playground=climbing_rope

playground=hammock

playground=tunnel_tube

playground=peak (small hill, often artificial)

There is some artwork (wooden animals) on the Weleda style equipment. It's the first thing the 1,5 year old noticed. Does it make sense to mention them?

Yes, an artificial hill for climbing is common on almost all Japanese playgrounds. Sometimes it is dirt, grass, or covered in concrete with stones embedded for climbing, but it is certainly not something I'd like to tag with a "peak" tag - it is clearly a "peice of equipment" for the playground. Also, if you feel it is necessary, you can tag the artwork with the artwork tag in some fashion. Javbw (talk) 08:44, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The extra values can of course be used, though the preference in the existing definitions and usage pattern is to avoid the underscore '_' character. I agree that hill is better than peak in this situation. The firefighter thing is a bit ambiguous, is that a pole to climb up or a vertical bar to slide down? --Polarbear w (talk) 10:16, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Is there a less military but good picture for a climbing rope?

Multi-Purpose Equipment

playground:swing=yes style tagging (similar to recycling:*=yes) would have better allowed to cover multipurpose equipment such as climbingframe that includes slides (or possibly even more verbose playground:equipment:swing=yes). In addition, that would have made it reasonable to include all equipment available to the playground object if the physical positions of the equipment are not individually mapped for some reason (now it would require rather long semicoloned value). --Ij (talk) 13:29, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

The multipurpose device has meanwhile been identified as playground=structure, which can have further devices attached. While I agree that the playground:swing=yes style would have been better when introduced, the current practise of micromapping shows that having nodes for individual devices is now common practice, with only a few summary tags on whole grounds showing up in taginfo. --Polarbear w (talk) 10:09, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Deprecating playground=zipwire in favor of aerialway=zip_line

I am proposing to deprecate playground=zipwire for the reasons specified here: Proposed_feature/aerialway=zip_line#Reasons_for_deprecating_playground=zipwire RicoZ (talk) 23:20, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

material=rope

"Rope" is not a material. A "rope" itself consists of material like metal (wire rope), nature fiber or synthetic fiber. The latter is probably the most usual kind for spider web climbing frames. MarkusHD (talk) 07:26, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

"Material" can have different definitions. The meaning can range from the matter over constituent or component to necessities for a task. In this sense I would not see a need to limit the definition to the chemical compound, and rather prefer to name the real-world categories used in equipment construction. For example for climbing frames, I observe a transition from stiff bars to soft ropes, since the latter are soft when fallen on and the head is less likely to get stuck in a gap. If you prefer to specify the matter in a chemical sense, you can of course introduce a sub-tag, such as rope=polyamide (Nylon) or rope=hemp. --Polarbear w (talk) 09:57, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

On the one hand this is pretty detailled mapping, on the other hand this might be inaccurate usage or misuse of the "material" key. That doesn't fit together. I see it the other way around: "rope" (as well as stiff bars) should be a value of another key, something like "composition". I understand your intention, but don't agree with your conclusion. But I don't want to bikeshed. MarkusHD (talk) 10:50, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

For being used 300000 times, of which 50% are wood, the material=* key itself has a very poor definition in the wiki, thus it has accumulated a wide mixture of values. However rope is being used only 7 times so far, thus if you have a better idea for the typical distinction in the playground situation you are welcome.

Springy

playground=springy originally defines "a seat on a helical spring", also known as Spring Riders. The problem with the tag is firstly, "springy" is in the dictionaries only as an adjective, describing the property of a spring, and rarely used as a noun. Secondly, there are other bouncing devices that use a spring that is not necessarily helical, such as the example below, or spring platforms, i.e. a board supported by several helical springs.

Question is, should we widen the definition of playground=springy, which keeps the currently tagged 920 devices included, or should we find more precise definitions for the different devices, potentially retagging the existing springies. --Polarbear w (talk) 11:03, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

We should definitely be able to distinguish these different kind of spring-based devices because you can use them in completely different ways. I find it similar to the differentiation between swing and basket_swing or even roundabout and aerialrotator. MarkusHD (talk) 07:19, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

SOLVED: Duplicate page

There is a second playground wiki page at [[1]] "/wiki/Talk:Key:playground:" which IMO should be redirected here. If anyone know more about it, please create the redirect. --Tordans (talk)

What you linked is this page!? --Klumbumbus (talk) 11:01, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Autolinking was broken, the "wrong" page has a ":" at the end. Corrected above --20:28, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

OK, This is the talk page of another page which describes using playground: as prekey (which is not yet much used). --Klumbumbus (talk) 20:52, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Jep, I understand the difference now. An update at [[2]][[3]] as well as a change to the page clarified it for me as well.---16:32, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Resolved

Key not fitting very well into the system as a whole

Sorry for coming up so late with this, but I think this tag is not fitting very well into the tagging system as a whole. Usually, with tags like A=B, B=C, C is about subtypes of B. Hence with leisure=playground, playground=* the latter would describe a subtype of playground. Admittedly, there are already exceptions to the rule, e.g. amenity=parking, parking=surface, surface=unpaved. There are also very few instances of the key playground:type=*. Not sure how to deal with this, probably we'll have to accept it, but I wrote this paragraph to document this particularity. --Dieterdreist (talk) 10:05, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

While I agree with your perspective. However, the key was introduced by proposal and unanimously agreed in 2010. Now we have nearly 20k instances. --Polarbear w (talk) 18:04, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Special:Diff/473726 ;o) Grüße aus Mainz --Reneman (talk) 13:40, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, back in 2010 the concept of A=B, B=C, C=D wasn't anywhere as common as it is now. Too late? --Dieterdreist (talk) 16:45, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Just as a side note, there seems to be a lot of uses of a playground:whatever namespace tagging scheme. For instance playground:sandpit currently has 662 uses. None of them seem to be documented. My initial guess was that they are a iD Editor preset, but it seems they aren't. Even though the tagging history shows they have been on a steady increase since 2010. It would be interested to know where they are coming from. If the playground tag is kept, it would at least help if there wasn't a tag competing with it. Especially since it's approved. Although like you guys I think there could be a better tag, but I'm currently at a lose for what to use instead. --Adamant1 (talk) 12:28, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

BTW I kind of wonder about the utility of tags like playground=swing, when things like swings can be out in random places not attached to playgrounds. Even playground swings. For instance, there was a swing set in a swamp near where i lived as a kid. Don't ask me why, but I can assure everyone the swamp wasn't a playground. Maybe a better tag would be something like equipment=swing. While it's currently being used for tags like equipment=4x4, that doesn't mean it can't be adopted for this. --Adamant1 (talk) 12:41, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

(Wops didn't read the dates) A swing is a playground equipment. They don't have to be in dedicated playgrounds to count. -- Kovposch (talk) 13:07, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I guess I would assume that since playground is sub key of leisure=playground that it would require that tag be used in the same area. Just like the convention for other sub-keys. It seems kinda weird otherwise. BTW, I guess playground:whatever is documented. It didn't come up when I searched for playground:sandpit for some reason though. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:16, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Just to support that, playground is tagged with leisure=playground 6561 times. Which is a little over 10% of it's use. So, I'm not the only one that seems to be making the connection between the two tags. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:21, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

playground=cushion

This type of equipment doesn't really fit with the rest - it's temporary object because it requires constant air flow - it's needs electricity, air blower and some staff to operate and supervise. (Rafmar 11 Oct 2017)

The cushions I see in Japan are permanent. I do not know what is inside their thick rubber exterior, but they are very bouncy for children. They are installed in the ground as a permanent structure and there for years, possibly decades (with maintenance). I have never seen them in the USA. Do not confuse these with "bouncy castles" or other temporary attractions - these are large (10-20m wide, 1-3m tall) buried in the ground, and possibly do not rely on air for their bouncy nature. They have signs requiring the children take off their shoes, and there is an age limit, but are unsupervised. --Javbw (talk) 13:08, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

So we should not map it. We do not map temporary events and temporary features.--Polarbear w (talk) 13:24, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

A "permanent" feature doesn't need to operating 24/7 to be "permanent". This is like an artificial intermittent feature. The equipment is always there. -- Kovposch (talk) 13:05, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I know of both a cushion and a bouncy castle, in two separate places, that are permanent structures. (At least as permanent as the playground itself, being there for several years.) They are not by definition temporary features. Neither are supervised, by the way. --Pbb (talk) 23:09, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

playground=four_square

"Four square is a ball game played among four players on a square court divided into quadrants." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_square

This should be a value. Taginfo:

Can it be a leisure=pitch? 328 sport=four_square instances.

---- Kovposch (talk) 19:57, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

There's a proposal for it too Proposed features/sport=four square. Should probably direct conflict discussion to its talk page where it's already been addressed. --Lectrician1 (talk) 20:30, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Monkey Bars

How would someone tag monkey bars? Midnightcomm (talk) 00:47, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

@Midnightcomm: playground=monkey_bars works on a Way. I can't find any other terminology for monkey bars and this key would make the most sense, so you should tag it like that. --Lectrician1 (talk) 12:01, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Midnightcomm: and @Lectrician1: their called jungle gym's in America or a climbing frame in British English. Which is usually what we go with. Given that there's over 5,000 uses of playground=climbingframe versus playground=monkey_bars and just as little for the other, {{Tag|playground|climbingframe} is probably the tag that should be used. --Adamant1 (talk) 23:23, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Climbing frame is different to monkey bars though, compare Proposed_features/Extended_playground_equipment with playground=*

playground=monkey_bars seems to be the accepted value now and is well documented on Proposed_features/Extended_playground_equipment

Resolved

--Aharvey (talk) 04:00, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

musical instruments

I propose

• playground=chimes - tubes of different length that produce different sounds when hit

• playground=drums - single flat surface when hit produces a low bass sound

• playground=xylophone - flat bars of different length that produce different sounds when hit

--Aharvey (talk) 02:47, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Do you have some fotos? We could include them into a proposal coming soon for extended playground equipment. By the way: TagInfo knows 5x xylophone and 3x drums (Plural). --Supaplex030 (talk) 07:17, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

On the other hand: There might be quite a few different musical instruments out there, each very special and very rare. Maybe it could be better to just use playground=musical_instrument with a description? TagInfo knows 22x musical_instrument, 10x music, 3x music_instrument. --Supaplex030 (talk) 07:22, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I didn't even know about that proposal, it should be linked here from the main playground key page. I started with just playground=musical_instrument but then I realised we don't say playground=stationary_installation, playground=motion_device, playground=activity_device so why not go into more detail for each type of instrument. --Aharvey (talk) 00:24, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Maybe playground=musical_instrument then musical_instrument=chimes/drums/xylophone --Aharvey (talk) 03:57, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

I added playground=musical_instrument to our proposed equipment list (and a note, that musical_instrument=* could be a useful addition). --Supaplex030 (talk) 10:02, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

wheelchair=designated

Some of the advanced examples given feature dedicated wheelchair swings, the tagged is currently given as wheelchair=yes but I think wheelchair=designated would be more approriate since these are dedicated specifically and almost exclusively for wheelchair users. --Aharvey (talk) 00:52, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

It seems your photo describes the perfect use case for the "designated" value. (nice photo) --Valeriobozz (talk) 06:22, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

playground=hamster_wheel or playground=treadwheel

I have been micro-mapping a few playgrounds and have come across one with a human sized hamster wheel/treadwheel. Looking on taginfo I found a few values with wheel in their name: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/playground#values. Should something like this be on the wiki? and should it be tagged as playground=hamster_wheel or playground=treadwheel?

I'm new to commenting on the wiki so if there is a better place to ask this kind of question feel free to direct me there.

Here are a few photos from Wikimedia Commons:

• 
• 

-- CoderThomasB (talk) 07:10, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Hey, there is currently a proposal process for a bunch of new playground values, which also includes playground=hamster_wheel. So I would recommend you to use this value :) --Supaplex030 (talk) 15:26, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

@Supaplex030: Thank you!

Baby swings

But there are divisions: kinds that look like a

• diaper
• roller coaster overhead Y-shaped locking retainer

Jidanni (talk) 22:03, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

swing with two side one for parent and one for baby

how to indicate this specifique swing? i have added baby=yes and two_sided=yes (like bench) but and don't know if is enough? -Yod4z (talk) 10:47, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Inappropriate (not very well chosen) values “stepping_stone” and “stepping_post” (and “spinner_bowl”)

Shouldn't the values stepping_stone and stepping_post not better be stepping_stones and stepping_posts? I think so, because the singular is not really appropriate (or intuitive) here. We're trying to tag an entire playground equipment (with these tags), not just one individual piece of it – or do we want to microtag every single stepping stone or post (or have to do that)? It is obvious that such equipment always consists of several stones or posts (or is there also one with just one stone/post?). And the description text already uses the plural (“Shifted stones or blocks ...” / “Shifted posts or poles ...). So why should the value be in the singular? Please note: in other contexts of OSM tags, “stepping_stones” is also always used in the plural, e.g. ford=stepping_stones or surface=stepping_stones. Therefore, the plural here would even lead to more consistency with other tags.

I am also a bit unhappy with spinner_bowl, even if it is not quite so clear here – I would find spinning_bowl more intuitive, because there is already spinning_circle and spinning_disc, and that would fit better in this series. And maybe more spinning devices will be added ... (I know there is also playground=spinner, and a spinning bowl is perhaps usually similar in size to a spinner, and maybe mostly only for one child – although the wikitext already says that it can also be suitable for several children. Therefore, I would not base my decision on this.)

The usage numbers for these tags are still very low, so I think this could still be changed (improved). Are there any opinions on this? Is there any objection to changing this in the wiki text? Last note: none of these values are included in the Proposal:Playground Equipment of 2010. Goodidea (talk) 23:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

This are values from the Extended Playground Equipment proposal (2023). We have chosen to use stepping_stone and stepping_post in the singular to make clear that these terms can also be tagged to individual objects (I usually map them individually, for example, if I can recognize the individual elements on aerial photos – but every mapper can handle this as he:she likes). "Spinner bowl" seems to be the typical term for this type of device, "spinning bowl" doesn't seem to exist.
But as always in OSM: These are just terms that are representative of a using practice or a definition. The tags do not get their meaning from the term itself, but from the way we use them. Supaplex030 (talk) 08:22, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Well, for me, this is a bit of a strange (I would say bad) decision with stepping_stone and stepping_post vs. stepping_stones and stepping_posts. A key that should be used for both – a part of a playground equipment and the equipment as a whole? Logical consequence: With a single node, you would not know whether it is just a single stepping stone (perhaps a leftover stepping stone from an incomplete equipment?) or a complete equipment made up of several stepping stones. If you really want to be able to map the individual parts, I would rather consider both spellings for the two different meanings (and according to taginfo, both are used - and if there are users like you who actually tag the individual pieces here, then the higher number of uses of the key in singular is understandable). Additional note: if both (spellings of the) keys existed, you could perhaps even summarize your equipment mapped into individual parts as a relation as one equipment with the key in the plural... I do a lot of micromapping in general, but with playground equipment I'm always happy to have mapped all the equipment in the right place, and I probably wouldn't map the individual parts for stepping stones/posts (I would probably map individual parts for larger equipment like structures or larger water play systems). That's why the singular values don't really make me happy, it feels wrong (if you don't map the individual parts).

spinner_bowl: OK, if you mean that this is the typical term ... I didn't check this. But for me, spinning_bowl would still fit better in the series of other (spinning) values...

One more detail: the link to the extended proposal is a bit hidden here on the page, I had to find it using a search command on the page ... Wouldn't it be better to put it at the end in a "See also" section (together with the old proposal, which is linked under "Status: approved")? --Goodidea (talk) 02:26, 24 September 2024 (UTC)