In general, how would you map an area which is created with the purpose of keeping garbage dumpsters there?
Note that the dumpsters themselves would be individual nodes with amenity=waste_disposal or amenity=recycling. But how is the larger area in which they are placed tagged? My initial idea was to use landuse=waste - but I don’t see anything similar on the wiki.
Additionaly, I think a similar tag is missing for non-enclosed areas, e.g.
The area outlined on the map containing 5 underground garbage containers is clearly a garbage-intended area, but I am not finding any good practices on how to tag that.
I can understand mapping the containers themselves (such as with amenity=waste_disposal as stated), and I could see mapping fencing and gates around it with tagging like barrier=fence and barrier=gate.
I’m not quite sure what the goal is of trying to map an area around the containers, especially in cases where there isn’t a barrier of some kind. If I were micromapping the area in that last picture, I might use barrier=kerb and maybearea:highway=traffic_island. If you’re familiar with the area and think something like landuse=waste makes sense I don’t think I’d call that wrong, I just don’t know as it’d be worthwhile unless there’s some other tagging for that location (like it has a name, or access restrictions, or something) which you’re trying to include.
Though I probably do plenty of mapping that isn’t “worthwhile” myself, too.
I just map the barrier=fence or barrier=wall and the barrier=gate then add the amenity=waste_disposal and amenity=recycling nodes where the bins are, without tagging the area with anything, and add access tags as appropriate.
I would do it in the same way. Having the nodes for the dumpsters plus the fence and the gate provides all the information required: There is an area where these containers are located. The containers then carry the information it they are used for waste disposal or recycling, if they are located on the ground or underground etc.
Giving the area additional tags makes things quite complicated. This small areas do not qualify for a separate landuse tag imo, I’d say it would rather be another amenity like amenity=dumpster_enclosure but that would not fit the situation in the second pic. And again it would not add any value to the information already provided by the tags given to the different containers plus the fenced area (if there is one).
What I can see there is a paved area where people can walk, if they carry any garbage for disposal or not. The only garbage-related objects are the 5 dumping hoods which can be mapped as nodes with all the necessary details. Tagging this area with landuse=waste or the like would not make any sense imo.
Generally speaking, there’s a real problem with the dedicated space accommodating such containers or machines. There are individual features for =vending_machine , =atm , =parcel_locker , =recycling etc, but not for the area with multiple of them, at most only indoor=room + room= somehow., or maybe =shelter for resting spots. An area of them directly could mean a very large container or machine. This is avoided for =washing_machine with =laundry .
Using =waste_disposal or recycling_type=container for each container is most useful when they accept different wastes, and for compatibility. But this implies applications need to use clustering or other generalizing methods in rendering, searching, or counting by different measures (container vs facilities).
I forgot what case I wanted to mention, but eg there are some man_made=traffic_signals for individual traffic light poles or signal heads, as opposed to =traffic_signals for the intersecting point, or stopping line. In theory, amenity= could be interpreted as a function or activity, so man_made= could be treated as a structure (however man_made= has its own problem with mixing different categories, and the terminology). Or maybe it can be eg area:amenity= similar to area:highway= etc, similar to how area:railway=station was discussed recently.
In example 1 and 4, they aren’t fully enclosed. You can’t derive an area from barrier= alone.
Sometimes you can identity the space on aerial imagery, but forgetting or not knowing what barrier= it has, and on which sides (so barrier=yes is still not accurate).
