Rendering of boundary=hazard

[serhii-muchychka]

boundary=hazard - a recently approved tag. Can carto render areas with it like landuse=military or in some other way?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dhazard

[imagico]

Tag is used about 150 times to map a broad range of subjective risks using mostly non-verifiable polygons. Like:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/904264846 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/145401143 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/916160167 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/917390205

We support mapping verifiable access limitations like fences or barriers and access restrictions on roads. But we likely don't want to render a very vague and broadly used tag (already in the first 150 cases) indicating subjective and largely non-verifiable risks in a way that indicates something specific. See also #2670.

[ZeLonewolf]

I am the author of the hazard proposal, and I don't think this tag should be rendered on a general purpose map. My motivation for boundary=hazard was to extract hazard boundaries from boundary=protected_area because hazard boundaries are not protected areas (in the conservation sense). While osm-carto only renders some boundary=protected_area when combined with other tagging, there are other renderers which do render boundary=protected_area universally and boundary=hazard gives a home for these objects that can be more easily ignored by renderers. Thus this portion of my proposal was in part intended to reduce the number of objects that were being inappropriately rendered (though not necessarly by this style).

I concur with @imagico's objections regarding low usage and rendering subjective hazards. While a case might possibly be made for rendering authoritative hazard boundaries from some defined government source (I am not making that case - just positing that such an argument might be made), there is no tagging that I'm aware of that can reliably distinguish such hypothetical authoritative features from subjective polygons.

[imagico]

Closing for reasons explained above.

[abdullahO2]

We have many places in the Saudi desert that pose a great danger and many died because of that, and I see that many of our editors locally use the tags for military areas in order to show those places to map users (and this is wrong), but this fact is because they are not convinced to put the boundary=hazard tag because It will not appear to users! Please reconsider showing places with the tag boundary=hazard

[imagico]

There is currently a single feature in Saudi Arabia tagged boundary=hazard:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1026632377

so there is no basis for re-evaluating the above decision. The question if and how the danger you have in mind can be verifiably mapped in OSM is a different matter of course (and one not for this issue tracker).

[abdullahO2]

As I mentioned to you most of the other editors don't put the tag boundary=hazard and I saw them putting the tag military=danger_area and natural=sinkhole to refer to large digging places that we call locally "دحل" and they are dangerous for those in the desert, and the current style of the map doesn't show it as a dangerous place, and you can see the places I mean from here: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1g21 & https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1g22 I expect it is appropriate for those places to put the tag: sinkhole=pit & natural=sinkhole see: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/natural=sinkhole https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/sinkhole=pit

What if places tagged natural=sinkhole can be shown?

see "الدحل": https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D8%AD%D9%84&

[imagico]

I see what you mean now. sinkhole=pit is not very widely used in Saudi Arabia either. I am reopening #2414 for the purpose of newly evaluating how consistently natural=sinkhole is used and to evaluate if we can introduce a rendering of this.

Generally speaking we want to render concrete and specific features tagged in a consistent fashion rather than generic characterizations like boundary=hazard that can be applied to a wide range of very different features.

[abdullahO2]

I understand your reasons, thank you, and I hope that places with the tag natural=sinkhole will be displayed on the map for the benefit of map users