[OSM-talk-be] How to tag forest play areas (bosspeelzones)?

[ghia]

> _I'm on the edge of using `playground=forest` or something similar, but 
> Key:Playground= is already used to describe devices and installations 
> on a playground, not the playground itself!_

I find that a very good tag as used in your example [1]. And "describe 
devices and installations on a playground" is a description of what 
items are there to play with, in this case it is the forest (and trees) 
itself.

(And contrary to common belief, a forest is not nature, but man-made, 
because 95 % of all Belgian woods are planted.)

Of course, there can be also additional devices and installations 
present, like bridges, tunnels, Tarzan-ropes, wooden climb-racks, 
obstacles, barefoot paths, etc., but this is not a requirement.

As part of the recreational function of the woods, ANB will provide on 
several places zones as playground, were people can go offtrack and in 
the wood itself. It is also for youth, like scouts, to play an afternoon 
in the woods.

In the same considerations, there is also a rising amount of dog parks, 
were dogs can run unleashed offtrack.

Regards,

Gerard

On 2021-02-24 13:01, Pieter Vander Vennet wrote:

> Hey everyone,
> 
> Thanks for the very interesting input.
> 
> After re-rereading the Wiki, the definition of 'leisure=playground' can 
> indeed be used. It can be a _play area_, which _often_ (thus not 
> always) contain playground equipment. The literal text '_specifically 
> designed for children to play_' is a bit of a stretch in the case of a 
> forest play area without equipment, but one can reasonably assume that 
> the area is maintained to be safe and playable - I can live with that. 
> So, I'll settle for 'leisure=playground'.
> 
> But then, we still have to discuss how to tag it.
> 
> I'm on the edge of using `playground=forest` or something similar, but 
> Key:Playground_=_ is already used to describe devices and installations 
> on a playground, _not_ the playground itself! I would have loved to 
> used it however, as it would totally make sense... except that is has 
> already a different meaning within OSM!
> 
> On the other hand, if a `leisure=playground` tag is present on the 
> object too, it is hard to misinterpret it as being playground 
> equipment...
> 
> At last, we should still find a suitable value. I'd again opt for 
> something in English, so forest_playground would indeed do.
> 
> Also, Marc G., I'm very glad you brought up the previous ideas of the 
> tagging mailing list; I was a bit reluctant to post there, both because 
> of the time it would require and because it is a very Belgium-specific 
> thing...
> 
> I'll also keep you in the loop and retag all your previous work to 
> consensus - thanks for your hard work!
> 
> Kind regards and happy mapping y'all!
> 
> Pietervdvn
> 
> On 22.02.21 20:45, Marc Gemis wrote:
> 
> Why not also ask the question on the tagging list. You'll quickly get 
> some inspiration and good ideas.
> 
> I asked that question on the tagging mailing list in 2016: 
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2016-September/030098.html
> 
> only got playground_type=forest_playground, nature_playground and 
> playground:theme as suggestions.
> I started using playground:type:nl=speelzone/speelbos (or :NL) since 
> then. Feel free to retag them to some consensus.
> 
> regards
> 
> m.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-be mailing list
> Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,
Pieter Vander Vennet

_______________________________________________
Talk-be mailing list
Talk-be at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be

Links:
------
[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/889035046
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-be/attachments/20210224/a73022d2/attachment.htm>