Talk:Tag:attraction=roller coaster

Map as a closed way (area) or along the route of the roller coaster?

The first version of this page, created 23 December 2018, prescribes mapping roller coasts are a node or as a closed way:

"mark the extent of the ground area of a stationary roller coaster (queues, building, fencing), and NOT the outer limits of all the track which can extend outside the attraction."

However, a review of all objects tagged attraction=roller_coaster as of April 7th, 2019 shows that the majority are open ways, usually following the tracks of the roller coaster. 1,572 roller coasters are tagged in this way, and only 331 are closed ways. Also, some of the coasters mapped with closed ways appear to follow the tracks rather than just mapping the "queues, building and fencing".

Therefore, I am changing the page to describe the most common way of mapping these features. --Jeisenbe (talk) 05:32, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

We have to distinguish between the attraction and the roller_coaster=track. This has not always been considered in the past. Also, railway=miniature is often added just to get it rendered. As long as roller_coaster=track is not rendered by itself I would not recommend it to review the tagging. You know that an issue is running.

The name should be written at the attraction=roller_coaster (node or area) and not on the roller_coaster=track (way) because it is very curvy.--geozeisig (talk) 06:14, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I agree that "railway=miniature" or "=narrow_gauge" are misleading. The proposal to use roller_coaster=track is perfectly reasonable, but at this time it is not more common that tagging the track with attraction=roller_coaster.

The rendering issues are separate from the tagging. Mappers should be able to tag features in a reasonable way, and then the team of contributors at openstreetmap-carto (including you and me) can figure out how to make a good rendering, once the tagging to agreed upon. (It's true that labeling based on a polygon is simpler, but a node is best of all)

I would recommend updating the proposal at Proposed features/key:roller coaster and submitting it to the tagging mailing list for a RFC and vote. Personally, I have no problem with either form of tagging, but it's clear that mappers really want a way to tag the track of the roller coaster, more than the area of the queues and buildings, so there needs to be an agreed-upon way of tagging the tracks too. --Jeisenbe (talk) 23:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I would also agree... I've had a few people who want to change tagging according to this but the common way to tag is to use the railway tag... Perhaps the track should be tagged as "railway=rollercoaster". But if you want everyone to start tagging them in unison with this tagging scheme, you need to finish the proposal according to Proposal process and get the tags rendered on the map Standard tile layer. otherwise mappers will continue to prefer the more common way of tagging them. --Nickvet419 14:59, 28 April 2019 (UTC)