[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Rejected - Reworking leisure=bathing_place

[Bert -Araali- Van Opstal]

I also ask the same question again , in most poorer countries without 
proper piped water supplies ALL waters are used to bath, bathe (swim), 
laundry, car wash, fetching drinking and cooking water etc... . I do 
remember that in most other countries in Europe the same applies, people 
are free to access public waters unless signposted otherwise, good idea 
or not. We don't need this tag.

I stick with "We don't map nature baths without signage (it is not 
verifiable) other than the surface, e.g. sand, rock and the paths/roads 
leading to it. There must be a sign as a bare minimum to tag it using 
the tags below." as in our wiki.
If you feel the need to do otherwise you could attempt to change this 
statement and use an additional amenity=public_bath or nature_bath ? 
Doesn't seem good idea to me people go for nature bathing to be private, 
not the ones commonly known, cliff diving etc... all different interest 
groups and different intentions using natural features. Compare it with 
other "sports" not practised in a place modified by humans.

Greetings,

Bert Araali

On 06/07/2021 14:37, gruebel2020 at online.de wrote:
> Voting on "Reworking leisure=bathing place" has ended. It was rejected 
> with 9 votes against and 8 votes for (3 abstentions).
>
> A large part of the votes against the proposal is because of the poor 
> verifiability. In my opinion the places that are meant in this 
> proposal are clear and verifiable. I had tried to set up many rules to 
> make this clear for others. Apparently these were not sufficient or 
> poorly defined by me.
>
> I would revise the proposal in the future and propose it again. I am 
> wondering if you have any ideas to improve the verifiability.
> Maybe you have other images that could act as examples. I know several 
> places, but unfortunately I have hardly taken any pictures of them so 
> far.
>
> I am still convinced that these locations have sufficient frequency 
> and relevance to continue working on them.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210707/bf01144b/attachment.htm>