[Tagging] Benches and hostile architecture

Vucod vucod at mailfence.com
Thu Aug 27 19:32:52 UTC 2020


Ok, I will use that with the tag for the physical obstructions.

Thanks all for the discussion

August 24, 2020 7:07:08 PM CEST Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com> wrote:
RE: "Would something like hindrance:target = lying_down or hindrance:target = sitting be more clear?"

While this is somewhat less ambiguous, it looks and sounds quite strange in English, and it's quite long.

How about "lying_down=obstructed", "sitting=obstructed", "skating=obstructed" or something like that?

I also think it would be a good idea to tag the physical obstructions, like width=, length=, slope=, arm_rests=, spikes=, skatestoppers=, etc, as others have mentioned.

– Joseph Eisenberg

On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 6:46 AM Vucod via Tagging <tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> Just to clarify an important point. The hostile_architecture key was suggested as a main/category tag to go along with specific keys (lying_hindrance, sitting_hindrance).
> Used alone, I agree that it would be very vague and could be difficult to verify. I would say to only use it in combination with specific keys but I don't know how this would be followed by mappers...
>
> On the specific tags:
>
> @Josepth Eisenberg(mail below):
>
> As others have said, no_* and *=prohibited loose the notion of hindrance that is crucial if we want to map physical and visible things. Would something like hindrance:target = lying_down or hindrance:target = sitting be more clear? And yes, the goal is to make clear that {lying|sitting|...} is physically obstructed (no relation to legal usage).
>
> @Martin Koppenhoefer :
>
> "what about benches being completely removed (or never installed), it’s equally hostile but not mappable. Or shops who are right away not built in a way that you could sit down on their facade."
>
> With tags like lying_hindrance and sitting_hindrance, we don't look for the intentions of the builders but we just look for these hindrances. So, we would not map your examples.
>
> "quite common in Rome are inside corners of buildings filled with masonry (typically up to 1,5m) so people do not urinate (not a recent feature, most look as if they were hundreds of years old). And in this case, it’s also probably more beneficial than hostile in the general perception. At least I guess many of us would deny a right of public urination in the city?"
>
> Yes with the term "hostile", an opinion could be seen behind it but the term "hostile architecture" refers to the enforcement/prevention of some
> behaviors whether it is good or not. In German and French, they use defensive architecture/ defensive urban design where it is less opinionated.
>
> @Mateusz Konieczny : ""length was refused as an official key for bench" Why? Is there some valid reason, or maybe it was part of proposal that failed for other reasons."
>
> length and width keys on benches were refused because they judged that it was going too much into details (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Attributes)
>
>
> On the generic tag:
>
> As info:
>
> - "Hostile architecture", a Wikipédia article, a subreddit and 150 000 google results
> - "Hostile design", 20 000 google results
>
> Vucod
>
> August 23, 2020 10:22:38 PM CEST Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The term "hostile architecture" is too vague. As an alternative "anti-homeless" is also not precise enough. We are getting closer with the initial suggestion that the feature is to prevent lying down, sleeping or sitting.
>
> However, I think the tags "sitting_hindrance=" and "lying_hindrance" are not clear enough in English. The term "lying" is ambiguous, since it can refer to "telling lies" (falsehoods) as well. Also, in English syntax it sounds strange to say something is a "lying hindrance", because this would normally be an obstacle which is lying down, rather than a hindrance to a person lying down. 
>
> So it would be better to change the order of words in the tags, e.g. "no_lying=" and "no_sitting=" , or just simplify to "sitting=prohibited" and "lying_down=prohibited" or similar. But I admit that none of those options are perfectly clear. Perhaps someone else has a better phrase? 
>
>
> We want to make it clear that lying down or sitting down is not allowed or physical obstructed, right?
>
> -- Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2020 at 10:38 AM Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 18:22, Oliver Simmons <oliversimmo at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Someone else can probably think of a better suggestion
> >
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture
> >
> > --
> > Paul
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200827/382f29db/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list