Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Don't ask for backrest on bench:type=stand_up #2365

Closed
SupaplexOSM opened this issue Dec 10, 2020 · 4 comments
Closed

Don't ask for backrest on bench:type=stand_up #2365

SupaplexOSM opened this issue Dec 10, 2020 · 4 comments

Comments

@SupaplexOSM
Copy link

Use case
There is a tagging for "stand-up benches", which can be specified using the addition "bench:type=stand_up" on normal bench objects ("amenity=bench"). SC asks for these objects whether they have a backrest. However, this type of bench is not intended to lean against and also from a constructional point of view it is often unclear whether one can speak of a backrest here or not. Therefore, the question usually cannot be answered clearly for these objects and "backrest" is unnecessary/should not be used in this case.

Proposed Solution
Don't ask for a beckrest on objects tagged with "bench:type=stand_up".

(See also this note in german language.)

@westnordost
Copy link
Member

Mh I would actually say any bench:type (for now). Maybe not seated but it is not clear if seated is the "normal" bench or if it implies that it is a normal bench with backrest. So better not ask at all for any of these.

@SupaplexOSM
Copy link
Author

Why not? Because the value is implied (block usually don't have backrests, loungers have one)? I think it should still be asked in the other cases, because "backrest" is something like the "main attribute" of a bench, but "bench:type" is rarely used (for tagging and evaluation)...

@westnordost
Copy link
Member

Because the value is implied?

Yes

@peternewman
Copy link
Collaborator

peternewman commented Dec 14, 2020

Forgive my ignorance @SupaplexOSM but even looking at the pictures and the Google Translate of the discussion I'm none the wiser. The upper bar in both cases looks very much like a backrest to me (compared to if only the upper one existed and you perched on it (like sitting on a railing). Are you suggesting they stand on the lower one (the wooden one on the left picture) and then sit on the upper bar? That just seems like a way youths like to sit on any bench even a traditional one.

FWIW I think it would help to add an image, even if it's just a stick figure crudely drawn on top, to illustrate how these benches are supposed to be used so we can differentiate them.

This is more what I'd imagine for a stand up bench:
https://img.archiexpo.com/images_ae/photo-g/66354-13362265.jpg

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants