I asked this recently in OSM US Slack but I don’t think we had any conclusions so I thought I would broaden the discussion.
Is there a tag for a sign that says “Please close the gate”? This would typically be found on a gate that does not close itself, often in a fence used to control livestock or wildlife.
Since open=* identifies a persistent state of the feature and a gate of this type could be left open or closed, that doesn’t seem to be quite the right tag.
Any suggestions?
I see this kind of notice a lot on entrance doors which do close themselves (but could be kept open with a dedicated mechanism or a stone etc.)
The tag open=no seems suitable to me, at least if the expectance is that people follow the plea. Ultimately, you cannot know whether a specific door is open or closed, you would need sensors for this or have to go there, the value of “open” is about a reasonable expectation, not a definite answer.
One of the recent places I encountered a sign like this was on a barbed wire “gate” strung across a road. To close the gate, you strap a loose fence post at the end of the gate to the planted fence post on that side. To open it, you free the loose fence post and toss the barbed wire off to the side of the road. That’s a pretty typical setup on ranch roads crossing cattle fences.
We opened and closed the gate going through. But when we came back, someone inconsiderate had left the gate lying on the ground.
So, open=???.
I have passed a lot of such gates, some with a sign and some without. In any case I think it is a matter of politeness to close such gates after passing unless there is a sign asking explicitely to keep the gate open.
Anyhow I’d say we do not need a specific tag for the sign as it does not effect the use of the track by anyone. If anything at all I would probably add a note.
'Round here, it would be common courtesy to leave a gate the way you found it, unless there’s a sign saying otherwise.
For example, a rancher might need to leave a gate open while moving cattle from one pasture to another.
And then there are gates like the ones on the BLM roads into Sonoran Desert National Monument along Interstate 8 which must remain closed to keep wildlife from wandering onto the freeway. Those are signed, and closing them is a matter of public safety.
As for whether this affects track users, it certainly does. Because someone has to go back to close the gate after opening it to go through. And that does affect travel on the track.
Adding locked=yes to a gate is supposed to stop routers from going through it.
Does open=no / closed=yes (?) do the same?
This is surely an argument but maybe seen different from place to place. A farmer in Australia told me if there is a gate on a public track easy to open and close for every trespasser it should always be closed as this is the reason the gate is there for. If you find one standing open or lying on the ground the reason is most probably that someone ahead of you was too lazy to close it. If the owner wants it to be open he would fix a simple sign or fix the gate with a lock.
This made sense to me because finding an open gate you never know if this is by purpose or by lazyness of someone else.
So you say. I travelled a lot of such tracks and by doing so I knew this would be different from travelling on an interstate although there was no OSM at that time.
Knowing that there are a couple of (unlocked) gates mapped on a track open to the public should contain all the information some travellers should need to understand that they might have to stop, get out of the car and deal with the gates from time to time. Having an additional tag “the gate must be closed afer passing” would not add much value imo.
By analogy with lock:leave_empty=*, I plan to use gate:leave_closed=* for cases like this.
I would hope not, since a gate that is open=no and not locked=yes could be opened to pass through.
However, I think I would prefer an appropriate access=* tag on the gate and the way behind it to indicate the proper conditions for routing.