<div dir="ltr">While hazard=yes is certainly in use (like barrier=yes and even amenity=yes), it shouldn't be included in the proposal.<div><br></div><div>In every case it will be more helpful if users make up a new tag. If there is a sign warning of monkeys which are prone to steal tourist's purses, then hazard=purse_pilfering_primates is better than hazard=yes, since it immediately make it possible for other mappers and database users to get some idea about the kind of hazard.</div><div><br></div><div>The current mention of hazard=yes in addition to another main tag, like man_made=adit + hazard=yes, is not terrible, though man_made=adit + hazard=collapse or hazard=toxic_air would be clearer - it's not always obvious which kind of hazard to expect. </div><div><br></div><div>-- Joseph Eisenberg</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 12:38 PM Brian M. Sperlongano <<a href="mailto:zelonewolf@gmail.com">zelonewolf@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">There's a few usages of hazard=golf_balls, which is more like what you're describing and actually a hazard. It seems a bit nebulous, but perhaps the sign could be mapped. That's different from a golf crossing, which is a place where golfers and golf carts would cross a road.<div><br></div><div>I've already added hazard=low_flying_aircraft as was previously suggested.</div><div><br></div><div>And with regard to the generic hazard sign, there is always the generic catch-all of hazard=yes!</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks for the link to the directory of German signs. I think most of them are covered, though there's a few outliers. I'm trying to err on the side of defining fewer values to make sure that we don't end up duplicating something that exists elsewhere (for example, in the cases of highway=crossing and traffic_calming=* which are both often signed as hazards). Essentially my net is "values that have high existing usage plus values that people feel strongly about including".</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 2:56 PM Martin Koppenhoefer <<a href="mailto:dieterdreist@gmail.com" target="_blank">dieterdreist@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">sent from a phone<br>
<br>
> On 4. Dec 2020, at 17:42, Brian M. Sperlongano <<a href="mailto:zelonewolf@gmail.com" target="_blank">zelonewolf@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> I am thinking this case (crossing golfers) is more of a highway=crossing rather than a hazard?<br>
<br>
<br>
I think it is a warning that a golf ball might eventually hit your<br>
vehicle, and if you’re prepared you won’t be startled<br>
<br>
There is also the crossing airplane hazard, even 2 variants, airplanes<br>
from the right:<br>
<a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_101-10_-_Flugbetrieb,_Aufstellung_rechts,_StVO_2017.svg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_101-10_-_Flugbetrieb,_Aufstellung_rechts,_StVO_2017.svg</a><br>
and from the left:<br>
<a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_101-20_-_Flugbetrieb,_Aufstellung_links,_StVO_2017.svg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_101-20_-_Flugbetrieb,_Aufstellung_links,_StVO_2017.svg</a><br>
<br>
They do not imply that you have to fear airplanes on the street, they<br>
are meant to prepare you for low flying aircraft.<br>
<br>
A picture list of all German "standard hazards" can be found here:<br>
<a href="https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bildtafel_der_Verkehrszeichen_in_der_Bundesrepublik_Deutschland_seit_2017#Gefahrzeichen_nach_Anlage_1_(zu_%C2%A7_40_Absatz_6_und_7_StVO)" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bildtafel_der_Verkehrszeichen_in_der_Bundesrepublik_Deutschland_seit_2017#Gefahrzeichen_nach_Anlage_1_(zu_%C2%A7_40_Absatz_6_und_7_StVO)</a><br>
but with this sign<br>
<a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_101_-_Gefahrstelle,_StVO_1970.svg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zeichen_101_-_Gefahrstelle,_StVO_1970.svg</a><br>
in combination with a text sign, any hazard can be signposted.<br>
<br>
These are only the official road signs, on footways and private<br>
properties, information signs etc., you might find all kind of other<br>
hazard warnings. Is the tag only thought for roads and official road<br>
signs, or is its scope extended to other official signs (e.g. in some<br>
forests, there are "Rabies prone area" official signs, military areas<br>
might warn with "restricted area, armed guards", and a property owner<br>
might allude their dog is snappish.<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
Martin<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
</blockquote></div>