[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - leisure=racetrack
lomastrolo at gmail.com
Sun Jun 24 18:16:11 UTC 2018
Il giorno dom, 24/06/2018 alle 17.42 +0100, Paul Allen ha scritto:
> On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 5:22 PM, Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi <lomastrolo at gm
> ail.com> wrote:
> > I have already RFC-ed this proposal in 2016 but it remained there.I
> > would like to go to the voting stage, please check it.https://wiki.
> > openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/leisure%3Dracetrack
> My vote is no.
> Because the proposal specifically excludes any other kind of racing
> than motor racing. Other kinds of
> racing (horse, dog, horse and trap, etc.) also refer to their
> facilities as a racetrack. I object to you pre-empting
> "racetrack" specifically for motor racing to the exclusion of any
> other kind of racing.
> This means that when somebody wants to tag a dog track they'd have to
> invent something like
> leisure=dogtrack. Or they'd just use whatever their favourite editor
> pops up as a preset in response
> to "race" without investigating if it is actually appropriate. So
> we'll end up with dog tracks mistagged
> as leisure=racetrack, or tagged as a mix of leisure=dogtrack,
> leisure=dog_racing, etc.
> I know you're interested only in car racing, but even that has
> pitfalls. What about F1 racing versus stock car
> racing? And are you also excluding motorbike racing?
> As it stands, your proposal is just going to end up with a mix of bad
> tagging. IMO: if your proposal says
> "this excludes XYZ" without it pointing to ways of tagging XYZ
> because there aren't any ways of tagging
> XYZ then it's a bad proposal. Because many people tagging using
> their favourite editor are unlikely to read that
> proposal (or the eventual wiki page) and won't get any alternative
> presets presented to them to tag XYZ.
> If you amend your proposal so that leisure=racetrack applies to any
> kind of racing and add a racetrack=* tag
> with a few possible values such as motor_car, dog, horse,
> horse_and_trap then it becomes more sensible.
> But still needs some thought with regard to F1, stock car, etc. And
> some thought as to multi-purpose tracks:
> do they get semicolon-separated values or the value "mixed"?
> All in my opinion, of course.
The main reason because I excluded non-motorised sports is because many
of them seem to have an already established way of mapping.
All this pages mention sports_centre and stadium as physical tag
combination for related facilities:
In my opinion including all racing sports would be a problem and put a
break on the "motorised" variable is the more viable way.
As for the term "racetrack", I agree it's ambiguous and I accept
suggestions. Maybe a more descriptive tag is needed (motor_something).
About motor racing specialities, I think it's argument for the sport=*
tag or another subtag someone may want to propose. This is not covered
by the proposal.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging