[Tagging] destination:symbol tag: country-specific symbols

Mon Feb 21 19:00:18 UTC 2022

We do have a workable tagging scheme for registered historic features with
identified protection agencies.

The nearest such feature to me that I've spotted on the map is
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/303681142 - a listed historic building.

Unsurprisingly, it's tagged `historic=building`.  It's also tagged
`heritage=2` (protected at admin_level=2, that is, by a national
authority); `heritage:operator=nrhp` (US National Register of Historic
Places - `nrhp` is the local convention for buildings so listed);
`ref:nrhp=10000482` (the reference number), and with `wikidata` and
`wikipedia` links for further information.

Another one is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/429545226. This one is the
entire farm, rather than just a building.  Once again it's `heritage=2`
(protected by a national authority), but this time the `heritage:operator`
is `nhi` (National Historic Landmark). Once again there a reference number
`ref:nhl=72000840`, and this time, the record is searchable, so there's a
`url:nhl` as well, which links to an extensive dossier regarding the
property and its significance, as well as a `website` link for the site's
own web site, and `wikidata` and `wikipedia`.

It strikes me that "National Register of Historic Places" and "National
Historic Landmark" are rather parallel to 'sites inscrits' and 'sites
classés'.  (Different protections, NHL is stronger [and National Monument
would be stronger still, but the last implies that the National Park
Service owns and operates the facility]).

I know that I've mapped some sites where the `heritage` is 4 rather than 2,
because they're protected at state level rather than Federal. There are
some sites that are double protected:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6502105 is one that's both National
Historic Landmark and State Historic Site, with links for both.

'Regional natural park of Camargue' sounds like a combination of
`leisure=nature_reserve` and `operator="Parcs naturaux régionnnaux de
Camargue"` or whatever the formal title is, possibly with the appropriate
combination of `boundary=protected_area` and `protect_class`.

Locally to me, natural areas are a whole patchwork of different things
managed by different agencies, and `owner` and `operator` are often the
only way to sort them out.  A typical situation is
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4836454 (which is owned and managed
by an NGO), https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6367671 (State Wildlife
Management Area) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6378234 (State
Forest), plus, a short way away,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11921276 (natural area owned and
operated by a township (admin_level=7). I'll concede that some of these
could be better tagged and linked.  At the time I mapped them, getting them
mapped in the first place was the top priority, and I always seem to have
more pressing mapping tasks. (It comes of living in a country with such low
population density outside the major cities.)

I haven't tried to symbolize many of these with emblems on a map, and I
certainly wouldn't try in Europe; my understanding is that in Europe, many
of the symbols representing the protection status are subject to trademark
law, and unauthorized use, even nominative use on a map, may be unlawful.

Not knowing the legalities with respect to the trademark is one reason, for
instance, that I've refrained from placing the distinctive icon of the Long
Path (an important regional hiking route near me)
https://blog-tw.nynjtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Long-path-race-series-2.jpg
on rendered maps. I'm fairly sure that my use would be protected as a
nominative use, but 'fairly sure' isn't good enough for OSM's practices.
But you're free to make your own decisions on maps that you render yourself.

(Excuse my terrible French, please, I'm sure that I've not succeeded in
making the adjectives agree with the nouns!)

On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 12:29 PM David Marchal via Tagging <
tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> I may have not made myself clear enough: I know that some symbols are
> multinational by essence, such as the motorway symbol. What I'm taking
> about here are symbols about which I have good reasons to think that they
> are national only. A few examples:
>
>    - ID15d: land belonging to the Conservatoire du littoral (coastal
>    protection agency);
>    - ID15e: information point related to an Espace naturel sensible;
>    - ID15f: site provided with the Grand site de France;
>    - ID15a6: regional natural park of Camargue.
>
> These are areas/features created through national law, or designated by
> national authorities, which grant these areas the status represented by the
> symbol. This status has a specific meaning (for instance, Espace naturel
> sensible is for sensible natural features which are created and protected
> by the French départements in order to protect outstanding habitats; as for
> museums, only some museums may receive this label, as long as they match
> the label criteria and accept the label and its commitments, which may
> perfectly not be the case).
>
> Maybe some of these ideograms have international equivalents; I'll only be
> sure by checking them one by one and there are a few (
> https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id%C3%A9ogramme_routier_en_France). My
> question was of general order: when, after verification, I'm unable to find
> international equivalents to the features represented by the symbol, which
> value should I propose/document? I intend to create a documentation for
> these symbols, precisely to not obtain 77237373737 different values by
> letting each mapper choose his/her own value, which is more likely to
> happen if no list of corresponding destination:symbol values is documented.
>
> As for using English, I'm not opposed, but find it weird to use an English
> value for a France-specific feature, especially if I use some sort of
> FR:xyz value.
>
> Regards.
>
> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com/> Secure Email.
>
> ------- Original Message -------
> Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <tagging at openstreetmap.org> schrieb am
> Montag, 21. Februar 2022 um 07:39:
>
> FR:site_classé is also a quite bad idea, tags should be in English unless
> absolutely impossible.
>
> Stronger protection for historic monuments in France than elsewhere is not
> a good
> reason to invent a new tag name.
>
> motorways also differ between countries in many aspects, but we do not
> have
> PL:autostrada and FR:autoroute as destination:symbol values.
>
> > Musée de France
>
> If I understand right the autotranslation of
> https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mus%C3%A9e_de_France
> then it is museum, right? Are there also separate destination signs for
> lesser museums?
>
> (and if there are some subtypes then I would use destination:symbol with
> museum
> as value and destination:symbol:detailed for extra classification)
>
> Having 77237373737 super-specific values (like
> PL:szlak_architektury_drewnianej or
> royal_castle_in_Kraków-Częstochowa_Upland or
> motorway_symbol_but_with_corner_damaged or motorway_symbol_2000s_sign_model
> based on ones that I have seen recently)
> would just ensure that this data would be impossible to actually use.
>
> Feb 21, 2022, 07:05 by tagging at openstreetmap.org:
>
> But the meaning is often country-specific: « site inscrit/site classé »,
> for instance, are a french classification of monuments which gives
> specific, increasingly stronger protection for the monument and its
> surroundings. And what about « Musée de France »?
>
> Yes, using such an ID would be a bit cryptic, but given the issues I
> explained in my first email, I see no better solution. Or would simply
> FR:site_classé do the thing?
>
> Regards.
>
> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com/> Secure Email.
>
>
> ------- Original Message -------
> Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <tagging at openstreetmap.org> schrieb am
> Montag, 21. Februar 2022 um 05:07:
>
> destination:symbol with value ID16a suffers from being some weird code
>
> Note currently used ones:
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/destination%3Asymbol#values
>
> Is it really impossible to use something like historic_monument ?
> Or "historic" which is already in use?
>
> Many countries have some symbol for historic monument, there is really
> no need to have separate value for symbol in each country or region.
>
> Feb 20, 2022, 14:59 by tagging at openstreetmap.org:
>
> Hello, there.
>
> I mapped many destination signs, with symbols and all, but I occasionally
> encounter country-specific symbols (many examples here:
> https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id%C3%A9ogramme_routier_en_France). I could
> of course create new destination:symbol=* values for such symbols, but many
> of them are country specific, such as the ID15/ID16 series, and creating
> undocumented, unilateral values disturbs me; I know that I can act so,
> according to the "Any tag you like principle", but I'm reluctant to do so,
> because I feel that undocumented/unilateral values are much less
> susceptible to be used/rendered, and what would be the point of using
> values for them to be useless?
>
> Besides, given the descriptions of these symbols, giving them an
> unambiguous destination:symbol=* value would likely produce rather long
> values; should a destination:symbol=* key contain several
> semicolon-separated such values, I'm afraid to quickly reach the 255
> characters limit for an OSM tag value. In such cases, is it acceptable to
> simply use the ref of the symbol within a country-specific namespace?
>
> For instance, mapping the symbol visible on the signs of the right-turning
> road (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=261676592312309) would give the
> following: destination:symbol=;;;FR:ID16a
>
> Would this solution be acceptable/advisable? In this case, do I need to
> fill a Wiki proposal, or is a link to this thread acceptable to promote
> this possibility on the destination:symbol wiki page?
>
> Awaiting your answers,
>
> Regards.
>
> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com/> Secure Email.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>

-- 
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20220221/62852322/attachment-0001.htm>