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

[Graeme Fitzpatrick]

On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 at 21:35, bkil <bkil.hu+Aq at gmail.com> wrote:

> Surely you could always refine tagging according to your needs (like
> with dog:species=Rottweiler).


No, I wasn't talking about the species, but about the "level" of sound
heard. A blind person can't tell if that's a Rottweiler, German Shepherd,
Pit Bull or anything else, just that it has a deep WOOF, while the other
dog has a sharp, shrill yap, yap, yap.

So you'd need to somehow account for level / depth of sound.

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)
>

No, personally, I don't think we should map that a private home has any
type of security, be it electronic or animal. Mapping to say there's a dog
here would be OK though.

Thanks

Graeme
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201016/7bc772cd/attachment.htm>