[Tagging] Golf wiki page

Yves yvecai at mailbox.org
Sat Jul 14 10:14:43 UTC 2018


You should pay attention to the message format, the last one is unreadable. 

Le 14 juillet 2018 10:57:07 GMT+02:00, osm.tagging at thorsten.engler.id.au a écrit :
>From: Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> 
>Sent: Saturday, 14 July 2018 17:07
>To: tagging at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [Tagging] Golf wiki page
>
> 
>
>On 14/07/18 15:11, osm.tagging at thorsten.engler.id.au
><mailto:osm.tagging at thorsten.engler.id.au>  wrote:
>
>While page is not the best... you seem to misunderstand part of it.
> 
>The "level" reference doesn't have anything to do the level tag. Or any
>tag at all. It's just saying there are 3 levels of detail at which a
>golf course can be mapped.
>
>In which case a different word can be used .. like 'order'. 
> 
>I didn’t write the page. I’m just saying you misinterpreted the use of
>the word “level”. The term “level of detail” is pretty common and means
>exactly what whoever authored that page is talking about.
>
> 
>As for the "How short is the grass" section, while maybe not expressed
>in the best way, that looks generally correct to me.
>
>Why not use height? already exists and is understandable by all. 
>
> 
> 
>golf=green or golf=tee_area has the shortest grass
>nobody seems to map golf=fringe or golf=apron, so these should probably
>go
>golf=fairway is slightly longer than the green, but still well
>maintained
>golf=mown is hardly used, can probably go
>golf=rough is the longer grass outside the fairway, it generally is
>still mowed, but noticeable longer
>natural=scrub is for areas that are generally not longer mowed, so you
>get very long grass, some shrubs, ...
>natural=wood, well, there are trees here
>landuse=forest has no meaningful difference to natural=wood in this
>context and can go.
> 
>Generally speaking, you have areas for green, tee and fairway (green
>and tee are NOT inside the fairway), surrounded by rough, surrounded by
>scrub and/or wood.
> 
>
>Grooming is used for piste and may possibly be applied here.
>https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:piste:grooming
> 
>Comment: not all golf courses have grass...  
>http://www.cooberpedygolfclub.com.au/
>where "greens are black and the fairways are white"
>So height of the grass cannot be used everywhere. 
> 
>Again, it’s not really about the “height of the grass”. Nobody cares
>about recording the “height of grass”. 
> 
>You have different areas with different meanings. Green and tee area.
>Fairway. Rough. (And yes, others, like bunkers [usually sand], and
>[usually water] hazards.) It’s just that for the probably 99% of golf
>courses that use grass, there is a direct correlation between these
>areas and the length of the grass. 
> 
>So for non-golfers (which includes me) the description of “If it’s very
>short and well maintained, it’s going to be a green or tee. If It’s
>slightly longer but still clearly mowed and maintained often, it’s a
>fairway. If it’s growing even longer, but still maintained grass, it’s
>rough. (And everything else is likely out of bounds)” Is probably
>easiest to understand.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180714/aa1e7847/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list