[Tagging] RFC - Bandstand

LM_1 flukas.robot+osm at gmail.com
Mon Mar 12 21:52:27 GMT 2012

That seems to be almost philosophical question about a perfect tag. I
prefer more structured approach, like you proposed for bathing.

2012/3/12 Johan Jönsson <johan.j at goteborg.cc>:
> LM_1 <flukas.robot+osm at ...> writes:
>> 2012/3/11 Johan Jönsson <johan.j <at> goteborg.cc>:
>> > leisure=bandstand is a good tag.
>> > The bandstand is a prominent feature that is easy to map, so ease of
> mapping
>> > with one tag is prefect.
>> Is this not bad, having more (independent) information in one tag? Imagine
> that
>> person A - technocratic deaf engineer who hates music
>> and
>> person B - artist who loves music and does not care a bit whether it
>> is inside or outside or anything about buildings.
>> Both happen to be mappers: on cannot input the interesting
>> construction without adding info about music, the other cannot enter
>> music without construction.
> That is the same reasons that I find this a good tag, whether you are type a
> or type b, you will know it is a bandstand and tag it with that. Easy.
> The type a-mapper could add more tags regarding architectural style, the type
> b-mapper could add more tags regarding music-style. If they do not want or
> know anything more, the tag bandstand is enough.
> If per chance they do not know it is called a bandstand I guess there are no
> problems if they map it with pavilion or music_venue
> /Johan Jönsson
> p.s.
> (As a generalist I would of course prefer if there where a tagging scheme for
> all pavilions and music_venues out there. building=pavilion pavilion=bandstand
> and music_venue=open-air_scene, music_venue:size=small or something like that)
> d.s.
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

More information about the Tagging mailing list