Proposed features/sailing club
|See club=sport + sport=sailing|
|Definition:|| Building used as a leisure and social club for (usually amateur) sailors by sea/river. |
There are quite a few of these around, at least four close together within my city (in England) however there is no clear way to tag them at present. The tag should clearly go under leisure=* as "the leisure tag is for places people go in their spare-time.". A club often has space for members to 'park' their boats nearby to the main building node, the already approved tag is waterway=boatyard.
This information is very important to members of these clubs and the clubs themselves are also useful as navigation points, for example for people walking alongside a river.
Please leave your comments here, though voting is not open, all comments would be appreciated.
- Why not create a generic club/social organization-tag with an additional type-tag/suffix that defines the type of club. With your current approach we need a tag for EVERY type of club/sozial organization. that results in a flat tag structure for essentially the same thing: clubs. there are not only sailing clubs but also country clubs, gentlemen's clubs, youth clubs and so on. all with special buildings, access restrictions and features. so why not abstract it to (example, needs to be discussed) leisure=club and add a second tag (e.g. club-type=...)or even better and more logical a suffix (e.g. leisure:club=sailing)? the advantage would be that rendering gets more simple and efficient since there is a general club tag that could be used for basic rendering, regardless of club type. with your approach this is not possible: every new club with its own type needs time until it appears on a renderer or other OSM-software. the second downside with your approach of just creating a new tag for a specific club type is, that when someone has a new club type he needs to make a proposal - like you, which by the way is nice! - in order to establish at least a way to map the club in a way all users can verify/interpret the tag. with the general club tag he can at least map that there is a club, knowing he's doing it the right way, even if there isn't a specific club type defined yet. My opinion: nice proposal but useless, since it doesn't solve any problems with the current tagging scheme. rather try to create a generic club-solution with sub-tags/suffixes to define the club type, like currently being done with the amenity=shop. But I agree with you that there is a need for this type of club and a clear distinction to leisure=marina. --Marc 10:34, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
- I have tagged a few near here as leisure=sports_centre sport=sailing name=<whatever> such as this one --EdLoach 11:56, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Alternatively, you could tag them as:
There is no need for your proposed tag. --Head 11:09, 28 January 2012 (UTC)