no-go-areas

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
35 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

no-go-areas

Martin Trautmann
hi all,

did you read about the Suisse tourist couple which was shot because they
got lost in a Brasilian favela?

NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) from Tuesday 31.12.2019. ("Schweizer Ehepaar
bei Irrfahrt duch Favela in Brasilien
angeschossen")

Other examples are e.g. Mafia areas within Kosovo - or name your own
home town no-go area.

Is there any option to mark certain areas in order to bypass routing
whenever possible?


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: no-go-areas

James-2
Wouldn't that just be a crime map or a bias towards areas vs others.

Sounds like an osm use case more than a needed tag

On Tue., Dec. 31, 2019, 10:18 a.m. Martin Trautmann, <[hidden email]> wrote:
hi all,

did you read about the Suisse tourist couple which was shot because they
got lost in a Brasilian favela?

NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) from Tuesday 31.12.2019. ("Schweizer Ehepaar
bei Irrfahrt duch Favela in Brasilien
angeschossen")

Other examples are e.g. Mafia areas within Kosovo - or name your own
home town no-go area.

Is there any option to mark certain areas in order to bypass routing
whenever possible?

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: no-go-areas

stevea
As a long-time OSMer, I offer perspective on two "dangerous areas" near me, one past, one present.

On my university campus (University of California) there WAS an area in a meadow which was grazed by cattle (both from the original landuse from a century ago and presently, as these meadows are grazed by cattle even today, at a university of tens of thousands of students).  A decade and longer ago, there was a swale (low-lying area) which I believe was human-converted into a sort of reservoir for watering cattle, but it had steep sides, was quite deep and could be impossible for humans or cattle to escape if they fell into it, especially when empty / dry.  Not by me, but this was marked on OSM as a "no go area," which I always found curious, as that wasn't an explicitly defined tag.  I'm nearly certain that today, this dangerous area has been "remedied" (filled in with dirt) and no longer exists as a hazard on campus.  In OSM, there is no longer anything (node, way) in the area to tag as such; it has effectively disappeared from both the real world and our map.

Also near me is a "beach" (it sort of is, sort of isn't) which is a dangerous place to ocean-swim, it is known locally as the "Toilet Bowl" as it has nasty churning surf and undertow currents which I believe have drowned at least one person.  When I heard local news that such a drowning occurred yet again, I endeavored to tag a node there with name=Toilet Bowl (dangerous area, no swimming) + swimming=no + hazard=yes.  (Yes, I know that violates "name is name only").  Also, there isn't a "physical" tag (like natural=beach, as that is unusual, though not wholly wrong, on a node).  Yet I couldn't help but feel that hazard=yes, a "draft / underway proposal" (since 2007?! really?) is insufficient:  the value "yes" isn't documented in the proposal, and others listed there, like chasm, radiation, rock_slide, minefield, playing_children... didn't fit a dangerous swimming area.  Plus, the hazard tag doesn't render (a triangle with exclamation point might be a good starting icon).

I believe OSM needs better, explicit tagging to identify dangerous, hazardous areas, and Carto should render these.  There are many different kinds of these, from those I just noted, to "high-crime area" and what others might consider sensitive or political.  (We shouldn't be afraid to say that an explicit hazard exists if one does).  A proposal that seems to have gotten stuck for 12 years seems it's a good starting point, can it be resurrected?  OSM mapping these would be another welcome feature in our map, as I know of no other general-purpose map (that IS how many use OSM) which identifies these sorts of "everyday" hazards.  Think about it:  a hazardous situation might find YOU one day, and you might be very glad you saw this on a map beforehand so you could avoid it.

SteveA
California
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: no-go-areas

Mark Wagner
In reply to this post by Martin Trautmann
On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 16:14:30 +0100
Martin Trautmann <[hidden email]> wrote:

> hi all,
>
> did you read about the Suisse tourist couple which was shot because
> they got lost in a Brasilian favela?
>
> NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) from Tuesday 31.12.2019. ("Schweizer
> Ehepaar bei Irrfahrt duch Favela in Brasilien
> angeschossen")
>
> Other examples are e.g. Mafia areas within Kosovo - or name your own
> home town no-go area.
>
> Is there any option to mark certain areas in order to bypass routing
> whenever possible?
>

The problem is that most of these "no-go" areas are subjective, both in
boundary and in level of danger.  If you ask a half-dozen people, you
might get a half-dozen responses ranging from "I go there all the time"
to "The police don't patrol in less than platoon strength".

--
Mark

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: no-go-areas

General Discussion mailing list
In reply to this post by Martin Trautmann
This question rears its head every year or so & the conclusions are always the same:

Far too subjective, Far too transient. Best left to be shown as an overlay by local authorities.
My police force produce both crime & road traffic collision maps.

DaveF

On 31/12/2019 15:14, Martin Trautmann wrote:
hi all,

did you read about the Suisse tourist couple which was shot because they
got lost in a Brasilian favela?

NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) from Tuesday 31.12.2019. ("Schweizer Ehepaar
bei Irrfahrt duch Favela in Brasilien
angeschossen")

Other examples are e.g. Mafia areas within Kosovo - or name your own
home town no-go area.

Is there any option to mark certain areas in order to bypass routing
whenever possible?


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: no-go-areas

stevea
In reply to this post by stevea
Really?  Actual, real-life hazards like [chasm, radiation, rock_slide, minefield...] are not worthy of that tag on a node and some Carto-code to toss up a triangle-! icon on our map?  Where's the harm?  (Literally).

Perhaps we implement these without including (or specifically EXcluding) the more "sensitive" ones which are considered "subjective."  We can't be "too subjective" if we aren't subjective at all.  But, explicitly objective hazards do seem worthy to map.

Many (most?) like radiation, live minefields, military bombing areas, sharp bluffs / cliffs are not transient at all and would likely remain as long-term hazards.

I think we should revisit this rather than dismiss it matter-of-factly as "oh, that hazard thing that pops its head up every year or so."

SteveA
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: no-go-areas

Mateusz Konieczny-3

31 Dec 2019, 19:35 by [hidden email]:
Really? Actual, real-life hazards like [chasm
natural=cliff?

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: no-go-areas

stevea
I've certainly tagged plenty of natural=cliff (and I'm not done yet), there's lots of them around me.  So perhaps hazard=chasm could deprecate as one value of the proposed key hazard, deferring to natural=cliff.

Still, there are plenty of objective, not-going-away-soon, not-politically-sensitive hazards on Earth.  We should map and render them, but to do so, we might resurrect a more-modern version of the hazard tag proposal.  Or anything else that would do the job.  These do seem like good, smart things to map.

Good dialog, thank you everybody.

SteveA

> On Dec 31, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Mateusz Konieczny <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> 31 Dec 2019, 19:35 by [hidden email]:
> Really? Actual, real-life hazards like [chasm
> natural=cliff?


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: OSM user diary etiquette

Alex Kemp
This is my first post within these mailman lists. Just in case I make
some mistake that leads to this message not getting placed in the lists
correctly, the post that I am trying to respond to is at:–
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2019-June/082747.html

1. https://www.stopforumspam.com/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=50236#p50236 :
• (email) Re: [Ticket#2019062210000073] Alex: Enough with the Insults
and Comdemnation (sic)
• 24/06/2019, 23:00: “we have removed your latest diary entry because it
was considered too offensive”

The discussion in the post linked at top is very one-sided. None of the
“obnoxious behaviour” can be viewed, since the posts mentioned have been
removed. Well, joy! Although 12 posts total were deleted by the DWG,
11 were saved by myself at the time and many of them can be viewed
elsewhere so that unbiased persons can make up their own mind as to just
how vile these posts were (not). So, in reverse order:–

(You will be disappointed if you are hoping to read lots of insults
and/or swearing)

2. https://www.stopforumspam.com/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=50239#p50239 :
• A Stranger at your Table 2019-06-24
• (the word-for-word post mentioned in [1] above that sparked removal of
all Spam-info posts in OSM Diaries)

3. https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations/issues/308 :
• Github email 2019-06-22: “A maintainer of the @openstreetmap
organization has blocked you”

4. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/alexkemp/diary/390252 :
• Post about AST Auto Centre + spam in OSM 2019-06-05, re-posted
2019-08-06 (spam-related material removed for clarity): “PoI Musings”

5. https://www.stopforumspam.com/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=50184#p50184 :
• Post about spam in OSM 2019-05-18: “OSM is now within an iteration of
spam-bot software (such as XRumer)”

6. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/alexkemp/diary/390418 :
• Post about spam in OSM 2019-05-12, re-posted 2019-07-12: “How to Stop
the Spam-Storm”

7. https://www.stopforumspam.com/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=50245#p50245 :
8. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/alexkemp/diary/390250 :
• Post about spam in OSM 2019-05-06, re-posted 2019-07-12: “Recent Spam
Attacks”
• (a set of statistics, originated to discover whether the then-recent
spam attacks were human or bot-attacks)

9. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/alexkemp/diary/158832 :
• Post about spam in OSM 2019-05-03: “Behold Cassandra”
• (this is the single post about spam in OSM that was NOT removed. Yet.)

10. https://www.stopforumspam.com/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=50404#p50404 :
• Email to TomH + Firefishy 2019-09-16: opportunity to use/test a
k-anonymity SFS API (zero response)

In Summary:–

OSM == OpenStreetMap
DWG == Data Working Group

https://www.openstreetmap.org/diary
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/alexkemp/diary

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_king
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Going_postal

A bunch of OSM folks, joined at the tail by the common mental
disturbance known as Narcissism, got butt-hurt by (in part) the fact of
my pointing out that they were malignant narcissists, and went postal on
me. Unfortunately for myself, they
Ⅰ. had controls of levers that allowed them to remove Diary posts that,
in some cases, had taken me more than 11 hours to research & write, and
Ⅱ. were malignant narcissists, which meant that they would do everything
in their power to harm me.

If you stand to one side and kind of squint at all of this, and after
reading all the available posts (above), and especially after reading
the extract from the email sent to me by one of the executives of the
DWG (bottom), you now need to re-join your bottom jaw to your top-jaw.
And yes, this really is Real Life. And it is about to get worse, since
it appears that some of these folks may be engaging in financial
mismanagement (at best) and/or corruption (at worst)…

A. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Nakaner/diary/42916 :
• Post about 2017 OSMF Board Elections 2017-12-08: “analysis of the
candidates”
• Heather Leson: “rarely active mapper … member of the HOT US Inc. …
would like to introduce a strong code of conduct with an enforcement …
emphasized her fundraising skills on the HOT board but did not collect
any money” … et al
• Emails from Nicolas Chavent (co-founder of HOT) + Severin Menard
(long-time member of HOT) reveal effects of a code of conduct complaint
within HOT, plus it running out of money whilst Leson was in charge

B. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SeverinGeo/diary/42854 :
• Post in OSM Diary 2017-12-01: “Leaving the HOT US Corporation”
• Severin Menard: “secrecy and lies were core within the board toward
the membership … End of September 2015, HOT US Inc should still have
approximately USD $152,000 for activities still to be done or to be
returned for one large multiple years project, while the bank account
was around only USD $10K.”

C. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SeverinGeo/diary/42924 :
• Post in OSM Diary 2017-12-10: “The history of HOT US Inc governance -
not to be replicated in OSMF”

D.
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/2017-December/004576.html 
:
• Nicolas Chavent (both a HOT US inc and an OSMF member) receives an
undisclosed Code Of Conduct (CoC) complaint from HOT
• That fact is discovered only due to a chance discussion with Severin
Menard (at that time a OSMF Board Officer, who nonetheless did not know
that Chavent was unaware of any complaint).

E.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Heather%20Leson/diary/43458#comment41276 
:
• Comment from alexkemp 2018-03-19 15:58: “OSM and gender discussion” by
Heather Leson
• (I believe this may be the action that placed me on the *Rat King*’s
hit-list; attacks within comments to my Diary posts began to escalate
after this point, culminating in June 2019 with wholesale slaughter
amongst my posts)

And finally:

F. https://www.stopforumspam.com/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=50236#p50236 :
• Re: [Ticket#2019062210000073] Alex: Enough with the Insults and
Comdemnation (sic)
• 25/06/2019, 00:33:

 > Dear Alex,

 > just in case this was not clear: Everybody else in OSM is allowed to
make snarky, cynical, or sarcastic comments, and we don't kick people
out for a single misstep either. It's just that the rules that apply to
you specifically have been tightened because of your past record.

 > Also just in case this was not clear, this whole situation has long
ago left the place where we were discussing what is true and false. Even
if everything you have said was factually correct, and everything
everyone else said was factually wrong, this would not change our
judgement one bit. Therefore we will not be drawn into discussions about
wrong or right; no amount of being right can nullify your obnoxious
behaviour.

 > Best regards
 > Frederik Ramm

 > --
 > OpenStreetMap Foundation
 > Data Working Group - [hidden email]
 > --
 > [Ticket#2019062210000073]

 > - Alex Kemp wrote:

 >> It is “Condemnation” not “Comdemnation”.

 >>> - this is certainly not just because you are 10 times brighter than
everyone else

 >> That was a “snarky, cynical, or sarcastic” comment. How come you did
not remove it? This entire post is also “insulting and offending (one
of) your volunteers”. Are you going to remove any future derogatory blog
entries or comments that you write on the user diaries? Or do your
actions only apply to others? That is the normal deeply hypocritical
action taken by folks like yourself.

 >> BTW it really stinks this far up your anus.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk



_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: no-go-areas

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by stevea


sent from a phone

On 31. Dec 2019, at 19:37, stevea <[hidden email]> wrote:

Many (most?) like radiation, live minefields, military bombing areas,


military=danger_area



hazard=*


Cheers Martin 



_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Too subjective & problematic Re: no-go-areas

ebel
In reply to this post by Martin Trautmann
This topic has come up before, and unfortunately when you think about
it, there is no objective way to define a "no go area". It's all
subjective. So it doesn't belong in OSM.

People do live in many of these areas, so software that didn't route
in/through these areas would be pretty bad for people who need to go there!

Plus, "no go areas" are often correlated with where ethnic minorities or
different classes live, which is not good.

On 31.12.19 16:14, Martin Trautmann wrote:

> hi all,
>
> did you read about the Suisse tourist couple which was shot because they
> got lost in a Brasilian favela?
>
> NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) from Tuesday 31.12.2019. ("Schweizer Ehepaar
> bei Irrfahrt duch Favela in Brasilien
> angeschossen")
>
> Other examples are e.g. Mafia areas within Kosovo - or name your own
> home town no-go area.
>
> Is there any option to mark certain areas in order to bypass routing
> whenever possible?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: no-go-areas

stevea
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
Right, Martin; thanks.  Joseph and I discussed off-list there is some conflation of tags from hazard=* which intersect well with at least one or two existing military=* tag values.  So, yes, there is some overlap with existing tag (natural=cliff, too).

I have read our hazard wiki (thanks for the ref) and also mentioned to Joseph that hazard=* seems (in addition to being 12 years old and ripe for an update) a bit too much "car and driver" oriented.  For example, if a sign warns of "moose crossing" or "children often play near this roadway here" OK, put that sign on a node onto or next to the highway.

In addition to chasm going away, radioactive hazards (there's ionizing radiation, RF energy...) and that there are even places where you wouldn't want to be standing during a thunderstorm as they are struck by lightning repeatedly (yes, really:  seems there might be one or two in Texas and Canada) there are really verifiable "hazard=yes" places (that are not subjective and quite verifiable) where a node and a brief mention might be a real thing we could very well want to add to our map.  Nudge forward, I don't have massive passion or energy to go much further with it, next up, please!  (Yeah).

What a great project, OSM.  (I truly mean that).

SteveA
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Too subjective & problematic Re: no-go-areas

pangose
In reply to this post by ebel
On 2020-01-01 15:28, Rory McCann wrote:
> This topic has come up before, and unfortunately when you think about
> it, there is no objective way to define a "no go area". It's all
> subjective. So it doesn't belong in OSM.
>
> People do live in many of these areas, so software that didn't route
> in/through these areas would be pretty bad for people who need to go there!
>
> Plus, "no go areas" are often correlated with where ethnic minorities or
> different classes live, which is not good.

I agree!

A map cannot solve a lack of general awareness when visiting a
new/unknown place. Going to the mountains to hike can also be dangerous
if you are not well prepared. This is of course not marked on the map!

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: no-go-areas

Paul Johnson-3
In reply to this post by Mark Wagner


On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 12:10 PM Mark Wagner <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 16:14:30 +0100
Martin Trautmann <[hidden email]> wrote:

> hi all,
>
> did you read about the Suisse tourist couple which was shot because
> they got lost in a Brasilian favela?
>
> NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) from Tuesday 31.12.2019. ("Schweizer
> Ehepaar bei Irrfahrt duch Favela in Brasilien
> angeschossen")
>
> Other examples are e.g. Mafia areas within Kosovo - or name your own
> home town no-go area.
>
> Is there any option to mark certain areas in order to bypass routing
> whenever possible?
>

The problem is that most of these "no-go" areas are subjective, both in
boundary and in level of danger.  If you ask a half-dozen people, you
might get a half-dozen responses ranging from "I go there all the time"
to "The police don't patrol in less than platoon strength".

Yeah, I get this same impression.  This has the potential to rear its head in a really classist, and varying ranges of racist, ways as well.  For example, go post on Reddit on any given city's subreddit, and ask "I'm moving to ___, what parts of town should I avoid?"  Fair warning, try this for a city you're familiar with, and be prepared to die a little inside with the answers you get.

Personally, I'm more likely to consider middle-class suburbia a no-go area because large parking lots make it easy for car prowlers no matter how many police are on the streets, transit coverage tends to be iffy before morning and after evening peak commuter hours, and 5+-lane-wide boulevards tend to be not-safe-for-life if you need to traverse them without using a car.  Your mileage may vary.


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: no-go-areas

Julien djakk
Hello ! For this kind of tagging, which is as subjective as the highway=secondary, there should be a consensus of local mappers. 

This kind of areas could be tagged as “you need to know the area to be safe among locals” :-)

Julien “djakk”



Le lun. 6 janv. 2020 à 05:23, Paul Johnson <[hidden email]> a écrit :


On Tue, Dec 31, 2019 at 12:10 PM Mark Wagner <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 16:14:30 +0100
Martin Trautmann <[hidden email]> wrote:

> hi all,
>
> did you read about the Suisse tourist couple which was shot because
> they got lost in a Brasilian favela?
>
> NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) from Tuesday 31.12.2019. ("Schweizer
> Ehepaar bei Irrfahrt duch Favela in Brasilien
> angeschossen")
>
> Other examples are e.g. Mafia areas within Kosovo - or name your own
> home town no-go area.
>
> Is there any option to mark certain areas in order to bypass routing
> whenever possible?
>

The problem is that most of these "no-go" areas are subjective, both in
boundary and in level of danger.  If you ask a half-dozen people, you
might get a half-dozen responses ranging from "I go there all the time"
to "The police don't patrol in less than platoon strength".

Yeah, I get this same impression.  This has the potential to rear its head in a really classist, and varying ranges of racist, ways as well.  For example, go post on Reddit on any given city's subreddit, and ask "I'm moving to ___, what parts of town should I avoid?"  Fair warning, try this for a city you're familiar with, and be prepared to die a little inside with the answers you get.

Personally, I'm more likely to consider middle-class suburbia a no-go area because large parking lots make it easy for car prowlers no matter how many police are on the streets, transit coverage tends to be iffy before morning and after evening peak commuter hours, and 5+-lane-wide boulevards tend to be not-safe-for-life if you need to traverse them without using a car.  Your mileage may vary.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: no-go-areas

stevea
On Jan 5, 2020, at 9:48 PM, Julien djakk <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hello ! For this kind of tagging, which is as subjective as the highway=secondary, there should be a consensus of local mappers.
>
> This kind of areas could be tagged as “you need to know the area to be safe among locals” :-)

I listen to this as potentially reasonable, but I am left with the (obvious?) question:  what, exactly, is the specific hazard?  Is it characterizable, identifiable?  Is there a formal border around it?  Does everybody agree?  All of those seem difficult "to be (true) simultaneously" (as I understand what is meant when somebody suggests "avoid that area because of, or unless..."), so I fall on the side of "if no identifiable hazard, then no specific tag."  In short, I think we agree:  too subjective.  Even WITH a consensus of local mappers, I don't believe it stands tall enough unless it rises to "true" for all three of those questions.  And likely some more I haven't typed here, too.  (Others might).

Specific hazards, that are characterizable, identifiable, confined to a well-defined area and widely agreed upon?  Yes, Earth likely has some of those.  A node tagged hazard=* might work well.  This feels like a rough sketch only (still) despite getting shot down repeatedly as an unfocused or wholly wrong idea.

SteveA
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Too subjective & problematic Re: no-go-areas

General Discussion mailing list
In reply to this post by pangose
On 20-01-02 12:23, pangoSE wrote:

> A map cannot solve a lack of general awareness when visiting a
> new/unknown place. Going to the mountains to hike can also be dangerous
> if you are not well prepared. This is of course not marked on the map!

I agree that I don't know any non-subjective way how to identify such an
area.

But a good map is for people who do NOT know this area.
People who know about neither need a map nor a warning.

Schönen Gruß
Martin


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Too subjective & problematic Re: no-go-areas

stevea

> On Jan 11, 2020, at 12:22 PM, Martin Trautmann via talk <[hidden email]>
> and
> On 20-01-02 12:23, pangoSE wrote what they wrote.

To be clear, the hazards I'm hazily identifying are naturally-occurring or are human-made real-life hazards that can cause you real harm if you approach them and are not careful to avoid them, not "stay out of that neighborhood" kinds of "hazards."  Things like an area which is radioactive, has a "falling hazard" (such as a pit, though I think we have "adit" for mine shafts — and we do have natural=cliff, which I agree suffices for what it is) and other unusual hazards like places which have a propensity to be repeatedly struck by lightning (that's a weird one, and kind of controversial, I know).

As before, I doubt "hazard" or "no-go" will get more traction than it has (here and now), I simply make that clarification.

SteveA
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Too subjective & problematic Re: no-go-areas

General Discussion mailing list
In reply to this post by General Discussion mailing list
On 11/01/2020 20:22, Martin Trautmann via talk wrote:
>
> But a good map is for people who do NOT know this area.
> People who know about neither need a map nor a warning.

Which those with more accurate, regularly updated data, such a emergency
services & governmental authorities, can provide by overlaying it onto OSM.

DaveF

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Too subjective & problematic Re: no-go-areas

Paul Johnson-3
In reply to this post by General Discussion mailing list


On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 2:25 PM Martin Trautmann via talk <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 20-01-02 12:23, pangoSE wrote:

> A map cannot solve a lack of general awareness when visiting a
> new/unknown place. Going to the mountains to hike can also be dangerous
> if you are not well prepared. This is of course not marked on the map!

I agree that I don't know any non-subjective way how to identify such an
area.

OK, too subjective for OSM then.
 
But a good map is for people who do NOT know this area.
People who know about neither need a map nor a warning.

Not our problem, we map the objective. 

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
12