Motorsports Racetrack Tagging Conventions

General talk Tagging general discussion
41

sport_feature isn’t proposed or named to be limited to some sports. So that would need to be changed on its side for the distinction made here.
Maybe start with motorsport= similar to whitewater=
If there’s a need to further show it’s a feature, referring to the conceptually worthwhile but poorly named aeroway:model_aerodrome= by the one blocked user , it could be be highway:raceway= / motorsport:highway=
Street circuits can still use raceway:corner:ref= etc to show it’s for functioning as a =raceway

42

Do =rc_car features belong in the same feature? It does use =raceway

43

So, essentially, you are suggesting that raceway= should only be used on objects tagged highway=raceway, and that everything else should be moved to a new top-level tag? E.g. raceway=kerb → motorsport=kerb. It would help make the overall tagging system simpler, as at the moment there are some things with raceway=* that require highway=raceway (like raceway=pit_lane), and some that do not require highway=raceway.

1 Like
Nuevas etiquetas que aparecen en España "Bienvenido Mister Tag" (BMT)
44

It makes sense to have rc car tracks as highway=raceway, but a lot of smaller courses that don’t have a defined route (for example a mini rock crawling zone) are tagged as leisure=pitch + sport=rc_car. You can see a rc car centre I mapped here Way: ‪Herts Nitro Model Club‬ (‪966853816‬) | OpenStreetMap

In the meantime I have been working on a wiki page of all the motorsports features that we might want to tag and any existing/proposed tags. It’s still a work-in-progress and the recommended tagging will change as discussions evolve. Link to it here → Motorsports - OpenStreetMap Wiki

If we decide that it’s best to migrate a lot of existing tags from raceway= to motorsport= (or similar) presumably a full proposal would need to be written and voted on rather than the existing approach of coming up with new ATYL tags to fill in the gaps.

2 Likes
45

I created a category for pages falling under “motorsports” as well:

Category:Motorsports - OpenStreetMap Wiki

I agree that a proposal is necessary and that the tagging space could use some cleanup

46

It looks like marshal_post won the poll.

For naming specific segments it seems redundant to have raceway:corner_name=*. I haven’t seen any examples where curves in the middle of named segments have their own name apart from it. A generic name tag combined with a corner number should be sufficient.

47

Thank you for creating this category. I have put together a draft proposal page with what we have settled on so far. You can see that here: Proposal:Motorsports expansion - OpenStreetMap Wiki (I am still working on Rationale).

Yep. I have changed it to being proposed as motorsport=marshal_post as part of moving a lot of raceway= tags over to a separate motorsport= key.

Having looked at a few examples today, I agree. name= would suffice for both corner and straight names, and the name of the circuit/configuration can go on the circuit relation. As an aside, there are so many (world-famous) racetracks that are a total mess of tagging and mapping right now. I’m looking forward to sorting them all out once we have a proper schema put together!

I’ve also been thinking about how to tag a raceway on a public road. Using the example of a corner at Monaco ( Way: ‪Quai Antoine 1er‬ (‪39839529‬) | OpenStreetMap ), I tentatively propose the following for this way:

  • highway=residential
  • name=Quai Antoine 1er
  • temporary:highway=raceway
  • raceway:name=La Rascasse
  • raceway:corner_number=17

Essentially, the aim is to be able to map recurring street circuits in the same way that we have xmas features mapped. As always feedback is welcome on these specific tags.

1 Like
48

Could also include:raceway:segment_name=X so if there are named sections that only apply to the racetrack.

49

I’ve included raceway:name=* as this affords the same flexibility as name= does. I think we only need the one name tag as long as it’s clear in the documentation how it should be used (e.g. for a circuit with no corner names, you can add name=Circuit Name, but where there are named corners or multiple circuits that share segments, the circuit name should only go on the type=circuit/route relations).

50

I have added 3 more proposed tags to Motorsports - OpenStreetMap Wiki - namely motorsport=timing_tower, motorsport=start_lights and motorsport=light_panel. These are the common names for these features, but if anyone has any better tags feel free to suggest.

51

I think that double-tagging for Carto is something that should be seriously considered by all current OSM proposals, given the project’s firm stance that an approved proposal is not grounds for adding support in the software.

By “double tagging” I mean specifying in id-tagging-schema that a

motorsport=run-off surface=sand

should always also have a natural=sand tag.

52

I don’t think this is a good approach. Yes, Carto’s stubbornness about rendering new tags is well known, but we can’t do anything about that. Saying that because Carto won’t render X, we should also tag Y, is a clear form of tagging for the renderer. By double tagging we remove any incentive for renderers to display the new tagging. Using surface= is in keeping with golf course tagging, where e.g. golf=bunker should not be tagged natural=sand.

For those that haven’t voted in the earlier poll concerning if it’s ok to tag e.g. raceway/motorsport=run-off + surface=sand + natural=sand it’s the second one in this reply Motorsports Racetrack Tagging Conventions - #31 by LordGarySugar . Based on the current views expressed, the proposal is going to advise not to double-tag surface=sand and natural=sand.

1 Like