[Tagging] RFC Update - Hazard Proposal - rock/land fall/slide

[Brian M. Sperlongano]

On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 12:54 PM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <
tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> I am not exactly happy about "rock slide" as it seems weird to use it where
> danger is primarily about individual rocks dropping, not about full scale
> rock slide.
>
> Personally I would prefer "failing rocks" for warning used by a standard
> road
> sign.
>
> (difference is minor, but if we have luxury of selecting any value...)
>

Since we do have that luxury, and there is a valid reason for preferring
terminology as actually signed, then we can adopt "hazard=falling_rocks"
(53 usages) and deprecate "hazard=rockfall" (182 usages).  These are small
enough numbers that there shouldn't be any harm in choosing the smaller one.

Can we treat landslide and rock_slide as the same thing?  If so,
"hazard=rock_slide" has 394 usages and "hazard=landslide" has 35 usages.
In that case, I would propose to adopt the more popular "rock_slide" and
deprecate "landslide" as duplicate.

Would this address the concerns?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201203/b9e3fd5c/attachment.htm>