[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Hazards (rock slide etc)

Brian M. Sperlongano zelonewolf at gmail.com
Thu Nov 26 14:40:40 UTC 2020

>    - The use of hazard <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:hazard>=
>    rock_slide
>    <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:hazard%3Drock_slide&action=edit&redlink=1>
>    is more popular than several alternatives,
>    - which are essentially describing the same thing: a hazard where
>    rocks, earth, or mud might fall from above.
>    -
>    - There is a big difference between rock slide, failing rocks and
>    landslide.
>    -
>    - I do not thing that deprecation of failing_rocks and landslide is a
>    good idea,
>    - I would keep them (I have seen signposted sign about landslide
>    exactly once,
>    - many, many signs of failing rocks - tagging rock_slide for either of
>    them would
>    - be incorrect).
>  This is good feedback, and I would potentially toss another into the mix:
hazard=erosion which has about 300 tags.  Do we think these four tags
(rock_slide, falling_rocks, landslide, erosion) represent four distinct and
separate things that are properly tagged separately?  I can see erosion
being "the ground may fall from under you at the cliff's edge" but the
others sounded like "the ground may fall from above".

The signs that I have found for landslide look exactly the same,
pictorally, as falling rocks, although I have found some with the actual
words "landslide".  It would be helpful someone can offer this flat-lander
examples where there are clear signage differences between these, or offer
clear definition differences between these values - especially if we go in
the direction of tagging unsigned hazards also.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201126/8049fdb6/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list