[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Objects generating audible cues

bkil bkil.hu+Aq at gmail.com
Thu Oct 15 11:31:00 UTC 2020


Surely you could always refine tagging according to your needs (like
with dog:species=Rottweiler). Although, I think the exact species of
canines could change much more often due to replacement and/or moving.
You probably also need to be an expert on the topic to tell apart
hundreds of purebred types and their voices, and then handle all the
impure ones as well.

You could also consider mapping their count, because that is pretty
easy to tell (1-3).

Anyway, I probably wouldn't overload the audible*=* scheme with
this. It seems like many are interested in this. Marking it may
involve hazard=dog, surveillance:type=guarddog, guard:type=dog or
guard_dog=yes.
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/hazard=dog#overview
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/surveillance%3Atype=guarddog
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/guard%3Atype=dog
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/guard_dog#values

Funny:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/guard_dog%3Anoisy#values
What about guard_dog=invisible?

So my question is still of a mapping ethics nature: would we be doing
any harm if we mapped whether a given private home has visible or
audible guard animals? (Sirens and other security measures aren't that
interesting from an ear-mapping perspective)



On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 12:32 AM Graeme Fitzpatrick
<graemefitz1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 01:10, bkil <bkil.hu+Aq at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> "hearing a dog" could be one of them.
>
>
> But aren't you then going to need to differentiate the sounds?
>
> # 18 has a Chihuahua (yap yap yap yap yap yap yap yap) while # 23 has a Rottweiler (WOOF)
>
> Thanks
>
> Graeme
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



More information about the Tagging mailing list