[OSM-talk] golf course marking

[Matt Williams]

On Wednesday 07 May 2008 08:10:02 Robin Paulson wrote:
> 2008/5/7 Kenneth Gonsalves <lawgon at au-kbc.org>:
> >  I am a newbie to OSM, and am trying to mark up a golf course. I have
> >  gone through (and added some remarks to) the proposal here: http://
> >  wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Golf_course, but
> >  could not understand exactly how to implement it. So I tried with
> >  using existing keys:
> >
> >  For the course: leisure=golf_course
> >  For putting greens:
> >
> >  landuse=greenfield
> >  hole=holenumber
> >  golf=green
> >
> >  For tee boxes:
> >  landuse=greenfield
> >  hole=holenumber
> >  golf=tee
> >  colour=black/white/red
> >
> >  For bunkers:
> >  landuse=brownfield
> >  hole=holenumber
> >  golf=bunker
> >
> >  For closely mown areas:
> >  landuse=greenfield
> >  hole=holenumber
> >  golf=fairway
> >
> >  For rough:
> >  landuse=forest
> >  golf=rough
> >
> >  For GUR:
> >  landuse=brownfield
> >  golf=gur
> >
> >  For hazard:
> >  landuse=forest/water depending on what is in the hazard
> >  golf=hazard/lateral_hazard
> >
> >  I don't know if this is the correct way of doing this, but the area
> >  is starting to look like a golf course:
> >  http://openstreetmap.org/edit?lat=11.39&lon=76.7225&zoom=13
>
> it (the map) looks ok at first glance, but osm is about more than
> making nice looking maps.
>
> there really is no 'correct' way of doing anything, mappers are free
> to lay down whatever and however they want, but if you're asking about
> commonly accepted practices, there are a few things i can suggest:
> firstly, landuse. all through osm, this tag is poorly-defined. it's
> come to mean 'large areas of land with common usage'. so, residential
> areas of a city, commercial (offices), retail, etc. it was not
> intended to be used on something as small as a golf course putting
> green. also, brownfield has a very specific meaning in geography,
> specifically http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownfield_land which is
> talked about on the map features page in less depth
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Map_Features#Landuse
> and similarly for greenfield, etc.
>
> please don't choose a tag just because it makes the item render nicely
>
> the green, rough, etc will need their own designations, they are
> fairly unique to golf courses when all their relevant properties are
> considered
>
> that golf course proposal looks a way off being complete, maybe wait
> till it is resolved and passes through voting? or join in the
> discussion and make some suggestions yourself

I've personally tagged much of a golf course using the 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Proposed_features/Golf_course 
proposal on the wiki 
(http://openstreetmap.org/?lat=50.87204&lon=-1.10058&zoom=16&layers=B0FT) and 
in the course of doing so have made a few changes (see discussion page).

So, it's not really a problem with the proposal so much as the OP misusing 
tags which weren't in the proposal.

Matt Williams
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20080507/0169767d/attachment.pgp>