[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - leisure=racetrack

[Lorenzo Mastrogiacomi]

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:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Asport%3Ddog_racing
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Asport%3Dhorse_racing
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dequestrian
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Asport%3Dbobsleigh
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Asport%3Dcycling
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Asport%3Dbmx

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.



Lorenzo









-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20180624/c18b5f51/attachment.html>