Add rendering for leisure=horse_riding #2344
Comments
|
I guess this could be rendered similar to dog park with horseshoes instead of paws or with a solid background and a horseshoe icon (like in playground). |
|
Why do riders need another tag (used 3800 times) ? With this problem I am not sure if we should render it special. |
|
Maybe the difference is between sport and leisure? This is not intended for horse racing, for example. |
|
@kocio-pl, that’s what I think (but please note that there’s separate sport=horse_racing tag). I mean, we can go to leisure=horse_riding to learn riding basics and practise (spare time activity). And in sports centre we can take part in riding competitions (professional activity). While it may be the same for a small riding stable, I think there can be a clear separation for bigger ones: Wiki (Riding) doesn’t tell what is the exact difference between sport=equestrian (+ some sports centre tag) and leisure=horse_riding (just ‘exercise’ versus ‘practise-in-spare-time’), but here I’ve written what I think about it. |
|
We don't have such a difference for any other sport, do we? |
|
I think the wiki descriptions for both tags are just too short to know. There's some clue on a Riding page:
but my English is not good enough to know what it really means. |
|
One more thing I’ve just read on German wiki: leisure=pitch with sport=equestrian is considered to be a fragment/subarea of leisure=horse_riding. In other words, leisure=horse_riding includes all facilities like stables (buildings), buildings where you practise riding (‘Riding hall’) and leisure=pitch if such exists. |
|
BTW: the mentioned combination leisure=sports_centre + sport=equestrian (2k of uses) does not have its own definition (at least I didn't find it) and is less frequent than leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian (14k of uses). I guess equestrian tags need some work before we can render them. Please use Tagging list probably to discuss it and make wiki definitions more clear. |
|
sent from a phone
clearly there are several quite different leisure things and sports you can do with horses, like horse racing, rent horses for people "going for a walk", halls for kids to go riding, people jumping with horses, etc. and rendering them differently can be justified. |
|
After my research the leisure=horse_riding should be the complete outline containing multiple buildings, pitches and so on. So it is equivalent to a leisure=sport_centre which contains buildings and pitches, too. But yes, a thread on tagging if someone thinks leisure=horse_riding should survive is useful |
|
... and equivalent to a leisure=golf_course. Why render leisure=golf_course and leisure=horse_riding not? (Here is a good photo of auch a leisure=horse_riding area: |
|
golf course is an interesting example. horse_riding and golf_cource have both "in use" status in wiki. |
|
sent from a phone
-1, we are looking here how people do tag, not discussing how they should. A leisure=golf_course comprises more than just the 9/18 holes course, typically people use it for the whole area, possibly comprising driving range, putting area, parking, club house etc. |
|
sport_centre is for venues with a range of sports (exception: natatorium). For venues with only one sport an own tag should be used when possible. |
|
I often surround many tennis courts with a sports centre which gets the name and address. |
|
This is probably just because the wiki strongly discourages to use leisure=tennis, see For horse_riding it is the opposite: The wiki clearly recommends to use leisure=horse_riding, see So in the wiki horse_riding is handled more like golf and not like tennis, compare Maybe you can render leisure=sports_centre + sport=* too if it is used for just one kind of sport? |
I don't agree. The distinction of what is a single sport or leisure=sports_centre is often very blurry. Even for sport facilities that may apparently be easy to distinguish as belonging to a single "sport", that sport may have varieties being regularly played on the same pitches, or on another type or part of the pitch or another facility within the perimeters. E.g. soccer or field_hockey may switch to indoor varieties in winter months. |
|
Please check if this discussion doesn't belong to Tagging list, since we have too many questions regarding tagging before we can even start talking about rendering. There's already a thread started by @gscscnd: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2016-September/030134.html |
|
What about this issue future? Is an icon project needed here? |
|
I don't remember the output of the Tagging discussion, you should probably check it first. |
|
If you need an icon perhaps you can take one of the two possibilties from #844: |
The output was to stay with this tag, and use I thought about an icon with horse jumping above obstacle. What do you think? |
|
JOSM uses these icons: I think this makes sense, |
|
Here is another possible icon: https://github.com/mapbox/maki/blob/master/icons/horse-riding-15.svg |
|
I prefer JOSM’s icons, they’re very clear, at least for me. That Mapbox’s looks like ‘i’ on a horse — it’s caused by those white jodhpurs which additionally make the icon look two‑colored instead of single‑colored. |
|
I think the JOSM icons would need refinement before they can be used on the standard map. Perhaps these similar looking alternatives can be used: Compare current JOSM icons: |
|
@Hufkratzer We can't use this icons due to their licences. There are also some technical requirements: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#map-icon-guidelines |
|
What happened with this project? The wiki say to name farmyard instead, but when you don’t know the limit of the horse facility, it’s better using a node leisure=horse_riding. While you can search the name via the search bar, it just doesn’t render. |
|
3 weeks ago there was a request to "revisit the topic" in #3660 (comment). To use landuse=farmyard is (AFAICS) only recommended on the German page DE:Tag:leisure=horse_riding. I think logically this only makes sense for places that do not mainly keep horses for riding but mainly do other farming activities because leisure=horse_riding is more specific. But it is probably often used additionally because leisure=horse_riding is not rendered yet and landuse=farmyard is (see also #3660 (comment)). In Germany 9.3 % of the horse_riding places also have tag landuse=farmyard, in the whole world 5.7 %. Should this recommendation about landuse=farmyard better be removed from the German wiki page? |
I'd so no. horse riding facilities can be part of a farmyard. Maybe change it to sound more like an optional thing that should be tagged on a bigger area then just the horse riding facility if it's not phrased that way already. |
|
On a bigger area ok, I think this goes without saying. But I suspect that putting landuse=farmyard and leisure=horse_riding on the same area element, as it is probably done because horse_riding is not rendered yet, violates the One feature, one OSM element rule. One area can only be rendered either as farmyard or as horse riding facility, not as both. On the German page it is said that landuse=farmyard should be used for professional operations ("Profi-Betriebe"), but leaving open what a "professional operation" shall be. Is there any reason why a place where someone professionally keeps horses and offers trails rides should be tagged with landuse=farmyard rather than with leisure=horse_riding? |
|
Am Do., 15. Apr. 2021 um 19:25 Uhr schrieb Hufkratzer <
***@***.***>:
On a bigger area ok, I think this goes without saying. But I suspect that
putting landuse=farmyard and leisure=horse_riding on the same area element,
as it is probably done because horse_riding is not rendered yet, violates
the One feature, one OSM element
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element> rule.
One area can only be rendered either as farmyard or as horse riding
facility, not as both.
landuse=farmyard is not a tag for a farmyard, it is a property on the land,
saying it has farmyard usage. The wiki puts it like this: "Area of land
with farm buildings (farmhouse, sheds, stables, barns, etc.)"
This is not conflicting with leisure=horse_riding (which seems a bit ill as
a tag, because horse riding is an activity, while leisure usually describes
the kind of physical place).
On the German page it is said that landuse=farmyard should be used for
professional operations ("Profi-Betriebe"), but leaving open what a
"professional operation" shall be. Is there any reason why a place where
someone professionally keeps horses and offers trails rides should be
tagged with landuse=farmyard rather than with leisure=horse_riding?
if you discovered that the German version differs from the original version
you should mention it on the German forum, so it can be discussed and fixed.
|
As far as I know the place where someone keeps the horses is tagged as building=barn and with the trails, it's more of an access tagging thing. Which I think goes to show what @dieterdreist is talking about. The tag seems kind of vague and not clear when or how to use it. It's not really a leisure thing if you confined it to "professional operations" is it? What would that mean and how would you determine it anyway? BTW, the English article has the same lack of clarity and I don't think things can be solved just by changing the wording of the German article. |
|
@Adamant36 , sorry, I don't understand you If landuse=farmyard can be used in parallel with leisure=horse_riding I see no problem anymore. The operation may be professional (or not) but the people who use it do that in their spare time (at least most of them), like in a leisure=fitness_centre for example. Meanwhile I have also found that @dieterdreist has explained it this way in a recent discussion in the German forum . So what exactly is "vague and not clear" in the English article? I would just add landuse=farmyard under See also there. BTW, buildings where horses are being kept should be tagged with building=stable (But because horses tend to live outside the whole place usually contains more than just a stable). |
The problem with the comparison to the leisure=fitness_centre tag is that fitness centers are contained in a building and there is no ambiguity about what constitutes one or it's boundaries (usually the walls of the buildings it is contained in). That's not the case with horse riding facilities. The English Wiki article says "The tag is for the whole facility which may include riding arenas, stables, riding halls, other buildings, paddocks and more (compare also Riding)." So, he tag could literally be applied to anything where there's someone leisurely riding a horse. Especially with the whole "and more" part at the end. Compare that to leisure=fitness_centre's article, "They are places to go to for exercise. Otherwise known as a gym, health club, or fitness club." There's no ambiguity there about what's being tagged or when to use it. Say you have just a barn, is that a riding facility? According to tags article it is. Even though you aren't riding the horse in a barn. How far down the trails do you map the area? A few miles because that's how far you can leisurely ride your horse? Do you include the house next to the barn? What about the front lawn or the driveway? When is something a "riding facility" and not just a farm where people have a few horses that they ride around sometimes? Everyone knows what a gym is. We shouldn't encouraging the usage of vague tags. Especially when there is leisure=track + sport=equestrian and there's zero reason not to just use that tag for what's clearly being used exclusively for horse riding. The tag isn't being used consistently anyway. From the research I've done it is being used on a hodgepodge of stuff that isn't at all consistent. For instance, it's used in some places where building=barn or leisure=track + sport=equestrian should be used instead. So, whatever your understanding of it is, it's clearly not being that way. That and I'm pretty sure we have had this conversation a few times now over the last couple of years and I've still not heard a good argument for why it should it be rendered or used instead of the other tags that cover the same things. In otherward, what's unique about that can't and aren't already being mapped with other tags? (that seem to be way more descriptive and better understood by mappers BTW). |
|
The current description on page leisure=horse_riding is in its style similar to the description on page leisure=sports_cemtre, just adapted to riding stuff. Since it is often more difficult to determine the boundaries for horse riding facilities than for sports centres, especially for indoor sports centres, it would be desirable if a node with leisure=horse_riding would be rendered somehow (see comment by @Nic787 above). Of course the trails / streets / houses in the surroundings, where the people hack out, do not belong to the horse riding facility, except they are on the property of the facility. Do you really think that the area that is tagged with leisure=horse_riding in the example on the horse_riding page should better be tagged with leisure=track + sport=equestrian and that this would "be way more descriptive and better understood by mappers"? |
Not really, because leisure=sports_centre article is clear in the first few sentences that it's meant for "a distinct facility where sports take place within an enclosed area." It's also pretty clearly gives details on what those facilities are and doesn't say "or whatever" at the end of the description. Whereas, the leisure=horse_riding article doesn't say anything that specific. Only "where people practice horse riding." Which could literally be anything anywhere. Sure, it might say the tag applies "may include riding arenas, stables, riding halls, other buildings", but if your using it on any of those things your either leaving out better, more descriptive tags or using leisure=horse_riding as an alternative tagging scheme. Which is the only ways (except a few times) that I've seen the tag used.
I'd be perfectly fine with that. Except it doesn't negate or address the problems that I've brought several times of it mainly either being used in place of better tags or as a an alternative/co tagging scheme for a bunch of other tags. Which we shouldn't be doing. Let alone encouraging by rendering the tag. Also, by encouraging the tagging of a node on something that has "difficult to determine boundaries" you would be getting into the same issues there are with the rendering of bodies of water that don't have clear middle points or boundaries, and rendering them has recently been removed for that reason. So, I doubt node rendering will be approved. Really it shouldn't be.
If there on the property of the horse riding facility don't they belong to it then? There in lays the problem I guess, because half the people using the tag would assume they do and half wouldn't. Clearly there is no good measure of what is or isn't part of the horse riding facility except for whatever the person feels like saying is or isn't a part of it at the time.
No. I don't think the leisure=horse_riding tag is necessary there because all the actual, physical, on the ground elements are already appropriately tagged in a way that makes it clear that it is a horse riding facility. Not to mention the name of the place makes it clear that's what is to. There's zero to add leisure=horse_riding to anything at that point. Except for useless duplication and having an alternative tagging scheme for it's own sake. I'd love to see an example of any other tag that is used that way. Also, are you seriously going to tell me that people are going to confuse the pitches as tennis courts at a place called "Lower Saxony Show Stables" that's tagged as a farmyard, just because the place isn't tagged as leisure=horse_riding or the tag doesn't render? BTW, there's a park near me that has a few horse stables for day use and trails where people ride their horses around. They do the rodeo there once a year to. I'd love to know how you'd tag that place as a horse riding facility, let alone why it should be tagged that way at all, when it's already a mesh of other stuff that is tagged to show horses are permissible there and you sure can't add leisure=horse_riding to the areas that are already tagged as leisure=park. Like you say there is no clear boundary of where the horse usable parts and the non-horse usable are either. It's pretty much whatever people feel like riding their horses on or not and a lot depends on when in the year it is. So there's really no way to tag it as a horse riding facility. Even though people the general, philosophical sense that it is used for that sometimes. My point is, it's not something as clear cut and easy to define as something like landuse=retail or other leisure examples. |
|
Following up on #3953 (comment) - can someone familiar with the domain explain to me why https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/203993861 is tagged leisure=horse_riding and not leisure=sport_centre + sport=equestrian? |
|
imagico has forwarded my request to here (Following up on #3953 (comment)). For me, classifying horse_riding as a separate tag is comparable to tagging for dogs. Dogs and horses have a special meaning for us humans. |
|
I don't intend to discuss how certain horse related features should be tagged. I am interested in understanding how things are tagged. So my question remains - why is Reitstall Wiener Neudorf tagged leisure=horse_riding and not leisure=sport_centre + sport=equestrian. Back in 2019 (#3660 (comment)) i determined that the tag is used with very poor in consistency of use and overlaps massively with other much more common tags. But things develop and i want to keep an open mind so i ask those more familiar with the field to explain to me the delineations between the different tags in practical use based on concrete examples. Is leisure=sport_centre + sport=equestrian considered a deprecated tagging (i.e. not to be used for non-racing sports with horses)? Or is leisure=sport_centre + sport=equestrian only used for facilities predominantly serving competitive equestrianism while facilities serving pleasure riding are tagged leisure=horse_riding? |
|
There is a larger area near Ebreichsdorf where leisure=sport_centre really applies (node: Magna Racino Ebreichsdorf (920147244)). This area contains beside the racetrack also parking lots and stables. Unfortunately, only one node was used for this. The area mentioned by me (way: Reitstall Wiener Neudorf (203993861)) but also many other - further example (way: Reit- und Therapiezentrum Kottingbrunn (180670645)) - correspond rather to the pleasure riding (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleasure_riding) corresponds. The golf course near Oberwaltersdorf (path: Golfclub Fontana (30551552)) is more comparable to the leisure=sport_centre than the two horse_riding I mentioned as examples. |
It is not deprecated, but it is not documented in the wiki anymore (see here and here). It is also generally used very little compared to leisure = horse_riding, see In #3660 (comment) you wrote:
If this is nothing that is going to work, I would propose to use leisure=horse_riding also for places where mostly non-racing sports with horses is practised; in these cases sport=equestrian can be added to leisure=horse_riding (while leisure=sports_centre without sport=equestrian is too general for non-sport leisure riding). But we also have 1k sports_centre + sport=9pin or 10pin "competing" with 4k bowling_alley, they are all rendered and I don't know why this is a problem. Compare this wiki discussion where (at the end) you can also find some examples where I would consider leisure=sports_centre inappropriate. Regarding the issue that many small areas tagged with leisure=horse_riding look more like riding arenas in the aerial view and possibly should better be tagged with pitch + equestrian, I got an idea: They mostly have no name, but a real horse riding facility that deserves this tag should have one. Is it possible to render only leisure=horse_riding + name=* (and not the ones without a name)? 6.7k (47%) have a name. |
|
We won't make decisions on non-label rendering of features depend on the presence of a name tag - that would be incompatible with our goal to provide meaningful and intuitive mapper feedback. My impression at the moment is that there is no clear consensus on how different tags for horse related infrastructure are delineated towards each other. If that is the case we would need to be very careful with rendering decisions. If we'd - as this issue suggests - selectively render leisure=horse_riding with a generic horse riding symbology that would communicate to the mappers that this is the tag to be used for any and all facilities where horses are kept for riding, including many horse farms or for example the stables and training areas for horses of mounted police units. I am not sure we'd do anyone a favor with that. The absolute numbers of tag use are not necessarily that meaningful because you would (a) have to take into account the ratio of prevalence of the different types of facilities in the countries where most of the mapping takes place and (b) you need to consider that leisure=sports_centre might also be used without sport=equestrian - either due to incomplete tagging or because it is a facility which serves also other sports. As i said elsewhere i would like to see us rendering more animal keeping related features in a differentiated fashion because those in many parts of the world have high significance for peoples' everyday lives. But we depend on mappers developing clear and viable tagging systems for those, especially in light of the fact that animal keeping practices varies a lot around the world. |
|
There's also some instances of leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian out there. I haven't looked into how many or the specific usage, but it at least shows tagging is all over the place currently. |
|
If horses are used as draught horses, there is no tag for them. |
Hm, from wiki/Key:leisure:
|
|
It may possible that the tag leisure=horse_riding goes into the wrong direction. A major difference from landuse=farmyard would be the type of use. Farmyard is a homestead for the production of food. A horse/riding farm is a service facility. |
|
Oh, I think this discussion gets too complicated for here (once again) and should better be continued on the tagging mailing list or on wiki/Talk:Tag:leisure=horse_riding. I don't think that the leisure key is a major issue, it also isn't for leisure=pitch. But perhaps the wiki description can be improved somehow (see criticism in previous posts, here and here). Regarding farmyard or not, there was a discussion in the German forum (already mentioned above) |
|
The occasion of my discussion contribution was the lack of understanding why a registered name for leisure=horse_riding is not displayed in the official OSM map, especially since this non-display is explicit for this tag. I have no other ideas on how to solve the dilemma. I guess the horse experts should come in. |
I have tried to explain that in #3953 (comment) - we render tags, not keys. There is no explicit exclusion. We don't currently render |
What other tags are being used? From the research I've done no one is tricking anything with other tags. It's just that how to use leisure=horse_riding isn't clear so people are using tags that describe the object better. That's how OSM works.
Taking it to the tagging mailing list is a good suggestion. It's ultimately not on the maintainers of the style to work these types of issues out or pick "favorites." It's probably pointless to ask about it on the leisure=horse_riding talk page. There really needs to be a wider discussion and more authoritative about this then the Wiki allows for. |
|
Of course, the wiki discussion pages can also be used to discuss everything; it is done everywhere all the time, it is completely normal. |
I don't really care either way, but the Wiki usually gets a lot less participation then the tagging list does and the more opinions about it the better. I don't know about everyone else, but I'd like an at least semi-definitive answer about it. I'd hate to see only a few people saying something on the Wiki being treated like it's authoritative when it isn't and then this not being resolved because of it. There really really needs to be more then a few rando's saying something on the Wiki for this to be even slightly figured out. |
|
Sorry, I don't read all posts in this long discussion 😅 Is it possible to render
|
|
I would like to add myself as a person who supports the creation of a way to render the tag leisure=horse_riding. |
Could you add rendering for the leisure=horse_riding tag?
Example: 323603669.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: