[Tagging] Mapping of kids areas

Никита acroq3 at gmail.com
Fri Dec 19 12:07:17 UTC 2014


> otherwise there would be useless overlap

It is similar to hotel vs motels. Once you see good hotel you will filter
out motels (hostels etc) from hotels. You don't want to classify motels.
You want good hotels.

> We should put the focus on defining criteria for distinguishing these two.

Ok, lets try:

leisure=playground (usually outdoor), kids_area (almost always indoor, esp
in Russia during winter)
leisure=playground (poor equipment, often vandal resistant), kids_area
(fragile or expensive equipment is not rare)
leisure=playground (almost never fee=yes), kids_area (it will cost you
directly fee=yes or indirectly fee=no via your prices
in restaurant/cafe/pub/stadium)
leisure=playground (provided by local municipality), kids_area often
provided by commercial company (malls, private kindergartens, hotels)


Trust me, there no overlap between:
"Детская площадка" (leisure=playground)
"Игровая зона для детей" (amenity=kids_area)

Just try to google these words and you will see real difference between two.


2014-12-19 15:30 GMT+04:00 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>:
>
>
> 2014-12-19 12:12 GMT+01:00 Никита <acroq3 at gmail.com>:
>>
>> IMO, kids_area=* is prefered when you have bigger feature:
>>
>> name=Joe pub
>> amenity=pub
>> kids_area=yes
>> kids_area:fee=no
>>
>> or explicitly using:
>> amenity=kids_area
>> fee=no
>> operator=Joe pub
>> opening_hours=10-20
>>
>
>
> I think this tagging is generally OK, but I am not sure when a standalone
> feature is a playground and when it is a kids' area.
> We should put the focus on defining criteria for distinguishing these two.
> IMHO the current definition of leisure=playground is flawed [1][2] because
> it says they were "commonly small outdoor areas", therefor implicitly
> stating that they might also be indoor areas and maybe "big". "small" and
> "big" are quite useless attributes because you don't know about the scale
> or what to compare it to.
>
> IMHO we should either require leisure=playground to be outdoor only (and
> kids' areas as an independent feature to be always at least partly indoor)
> or make kids' area a feature that is always provided by another feature and
> cannot stand alone, otherwise there would be useless overlap. We should
> also explicitly state in playground that it is only about stand-alone
> features and not for playing areas provided by shops or similar.
>
> The current playground definition already includes places with
> surveillance and which require to pay a fee (suggested keys surveillance
> and fee).
>
> cheers,
> Martin
>
> [1] http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dplayground
> [2]
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:leisure%3Dplayground#Better_definition
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20141219/02aaff29/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list