Talk:Proposed features/Bench

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Comments started on the proposal page

I think we need a tag like this. --Mgeiser 20:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I know I would use this. Alv 08:57, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Isn't this the same or similar to the already proposed Proposed_features/Street_Furniture? Something needs to be done to coordinate all this. BlueMM 00:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with this proposal, I use amenity=park_bench till now for that. --Uboot 14:21, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I already have mapped a lot of amenity=park_bench. I thus support this proposal, but prefer park_bench over bench as it is more specific SlowRider 19:55, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I just added a bunch of amenity=park_bench’es and would like to see them show up on the map. Also note that this is the almost most-oftenly used tag on that has no wiki page (if that is an indicator for acceptence) --Nomeata 16:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Why is park_bench better than bench? What's wrong with bench at bus stops etc? --Jttt 19:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

  • I think that, although physikally similar, they have quite a different purpose. OTOH, it might just be that I’m german, and therefore prefer parkbench over bench, because „Parkbank“ is less ambigous than „Bank“, which could be the financial institution. --Nomeata 22:46, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
    • You can rest on both park bench and bus stop bench. When you looking for quite place to sit, you will first look for park and then for bench. Also it's not just bus stop benches. You can find bench in countryside under old trees, in calm streets etc. --Jttt 07:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
      • Personally, I tend to think of these benches as park benches as well, but this seems to slightly incorrect, so I’ll leave this decision to the native speakers. I mostly care about getting a symbol on the map anyways :-) --Nomeata 13:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • I definably think this should be amenity=bench. This way we wouldn't need another tag for a bench at a bus-stop, and in the outside parks. EsbenDamgaard 18:53, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
    • I already use amenity=bench for the same reason. Many benches are placed along footpaths and at viewpoints. Excellent to know where they are when planning lunch! MikeCollinson 16:32, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
    • You can find benches at playgrounds, in pedestrian areas, at viewpoints, at bus-stop and also in parks. Definitely amenity=bench has to be preferred. Germans tend to use amenity=park_bench because in this way they try to resolve the ambiguity of the German word Bank which means bench or bank (i.e. the financial institution). Actually 4/5 of all nodes with amenity=park_bench are in germany.osm. So please use amenity=bench instead of the superfluous "park_bench"! --Hatzfeld 07:45, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Some areas can be clearly overseen but sometimes parks can be sort of huge. Finding benches is not always that easy and when looking for a spot to have picnic amenity=bench would certainly make a lot of sense. --Frabi 07:52, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Think amenity=bench is realy better then park_bench. Only in Germany we need this differentiation between bench and park bench in our native language, to distinguisch the money bank ("Bank" in german) from the bench (also "Bank" in german) S.A.L. 09:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
    • I don't want to enforce park_bench, but it has been chosen with reason. lists various further meanings of "bench" alone, including banquets, berms and river terraces. Any native speaker? --SlowRider 10:35, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
      • But most of these are no amenitys S.A.L. 10:42, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
  • I've added the optional tag backrest=yes/no hope that's ok, don't know if this is the right way to propose a further tag in a proposal (never done this before, i'm new with this)? S.A.L. 20:44, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I like amenity=bench too. park_bench would be way too specific, but that's already been said above. HannesHH 14:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
  • very important for some uses and user groups - I've been using it extensively --Hubne 09:16, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


amenity=bench would be better than listing all the different types of bench (as in amenity=park_bench). The latter just happens to be a bench in a park.

Yes, that's my opinion. too. I'm still using amenity=bench. --HoH 19:16, 5 July 2008 (UTC)


As the last comment is almost a month old, I suggest to start RFC (subsequently) voting now … --Tordanik 15:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Six weeks later and voting still didn't start. I will do it by myself in few days if pkroliko wouldn't do it. --Jttt 19:14, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
As it looks now, the proposal should be rewritten before a new vote starts, most opposed have the same reason to oppose, and as of now it doesn't look like it will pass. --Skippern 15:14, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
I wouldn't make such a big deal of it. The proposal still have more than enough approvals. Bench=permanent can be imho changed to permanent=yes without new voting. --Jttt 17:00, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Approval discussion moved from the proposal page

bench=permanent should be discussed further or removed from the proposal before this proposal should be approved.--Nickvet419 12:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Says who? Chriscf 15:28, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Says there are 2 seporate tags here and this proposal should not pass unless both tags are agreed upon or one is removed --Nickvet419 14:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Actually 3 tags in this proposal, but bench=permanent was not agreed on.--Nickvet419 14:37, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Again, who said that the proposal must stand or fall as a whole? Chriscf 09:36, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
because the entire proposal was voted on not just a single key. --Nickvet419 01:57, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
You seem to make the mistake of assuming that anyone cares. Chriscf 10:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
And you seem to shortcut every process. --Skippern 10:18, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

The proposal has been approved. 19 votes approved the proposal, 5 votes opposed the prosal. Can somebody please do post-vote cleanup? I would suggest to remove bench=permanent from Map features version. --Jttt 16:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Voting results

We have a clear approval of amenity=bench and and backrest=yes/no while bench=permanent and length=* needs to be discussed.
Now lets find a consents or just remove the other tags!
Alternatives for bench=permanent (see Talk:Proposed features/permanent):

  • permanent=yes/no
  • movable=yes/no

Alternatives for length=*:

  • width=*
  • seats=*

What do you think? --Phobie 17:16, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I think we should continue or restart a vote on amenity=bench + backrest=yes/no only for 15 days, and then move to the other more controversory tags Sletuffe 17:53, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Or, alternatively, we could not get tied up in bureaucracy and instead consider that, due to its widespread use, solid consensus here, and lack of objections, that amenity=bench is approved. There's no pressing need to decide on the rest, but it's clear that the core of the proposal is uncontroversial. Chriscf 09:40, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

So just move the tags that wern't approved to their own proposal, and move this one to post-vote cleanup. In the future we should only limit one tag/key per vote.--Nickvet419 01:54, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

I think it would be easier if we just start a second vote in this proposal for these new optional tags. That's not very sophisticated and the approve of the whole proposal will be delayed for just 15 days. S.A.L. 09:35, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes to the first part and no to the second part. Child-keys like backrest should always be in the main proposal! It can not be voted on addr:interpolation without addr:housenumber! If some keys are objected they can be removed forever or improved in a new proposal. --Phobie 05:33, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Phobies proposal sounds good. I approve this. S.A.L. 09:35, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I tried to open a new vote for all optional keys on the proposal page. --Phobie 13:02, 16 December 2008 (UTC)