Proposal talk:Soccer field

lighting or lit

The tag lit=* already exists for the same use that lighting. It should be better to use it. FrViPofm 20:06, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Render whitelenes

I can see the renderer render sports fields with markings. Many of the problems of visibility on the map for any sports fields can be solved by rendering of markings. Gnonthgol 20:28, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Not a Proposal | markings

@whoever :

The page Any_tags_you_like says :

You should create a proposal for your feature, if:

... 2. You are unsure how to model it, or ...

I can understand the article is not a formal proposal, but I wonder how I can make a proposal if I'm unsure how to model what it is I want solved. I'd be happy to use another term, but I want to make sure my issue is addressed and that's why I've taken the time to write this admittedly unfinished "proposal". Someone on the talk-ca mailing list mentioned I should use overlays. What is an overlay and what is a marking (see below) ?

@Gnonthgol : Can you elaborate ? Do you have examples ? One issue that comes to mind is generalization ? Do you mean using pictogranms (markings ?) instead of polygons at some zoom levels to unclutter the map ?

I mean that you can have a big area covering the fields (leisure=sport surface=grass) and some areas covering the playing area of the fields (markings=soccer). This will be rendered as you might see on an areal photo on smaller zoom levels. This way we can cover cases of multiple fields and multiple sports on the same area and it might look better. Gnonthgol 14:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

@Gnonthgol : thanx. Now here's what I got for a suggestion from someone else : "I suggest using leisure=pitch instead of leisure=playground. 'Playground' is used more for slides, and monkey bars, whereas 'pitch' refers to a field for sports." Including your suggestion, that's three leisure=something options. I guess I'll have to try things out, but that's almost like tagging for the renderer at this point ...