Please note that names are not for descriptions: osm.wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions

Reverting “name=Patinoire” on ice rink.

Please follow the standard where the school name is attached to the school grounds, not the school building: amenity=school

changeset/176024158

Thank you for bringing this to the community. I'll continue this discussion on the forum thread you created.

Flipping this around, is there a good reason to deviate from convention? In general OSM prefers names in full: osm.wiki/Abbreviations

I personally see no good reason to abbreviate Québec; OSM data does not need to accommodate automated envelope readers, is not bound by space limitations on a paper form. Also non-abbreviated names are unambiguous to people unfamiliar with the area.

Hello.

I don't know how I could only become aware of your comment almost a year after the fact, but here am I.

I've always been dissatisfied with overloading the `name` tag to distinguish between baseball fields in a single park, but it was the best I could come up with.

Having a clear way to tell the baseball fields apart is crucial as other information databases (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons) link to OpenStreetMap elements and just relying on OSM IDs is prone to eventual rot, with no clear hint about what's what, making it complicated to re-establish a link between the two.

Your `ref` idea is a neat way to accomplish my goal. I've started to implement it, there's about 150 baseball fields left to change in Québec, I'll get around to it.

Alas, the osmcarto renderer does not display the `ref` on the map, so from a cursory look, a random OSM user will not be able to tell the fields apart. Despite this, I feel the overall situation is way better semantically.

Thank you for the great hint.

Hi Graptemys,

[adding a generic name wouldn't reflect reality and wouldn't help anyone find the field.]

Alas, neither nominatim nor the current popular tile generators do a great job at helping someone find unnamed baseball fields. This is even truer on a visual level for rectangle-shaped soccer vs. american/canadian football fields; at least a baseball field shape is somewhat recognizable.

I totally understand and accept that we shouldn't tag for the renderer, but it's so tempting sometimes.

[noname=yes seems better than adding a generic name]

You just taught me today about the existence of `noname=yes`. That would make perfect sense. I've consequently de-baptized the Parc du Père-Marquette baseball field in changeset changeset/140392873 — thank you for your input on this. I plan to undo those inappropriate namings I've done in the upcoming weeks.

[There are now overlapping ways for `leisure=sports_centre` and `leisure=pitch`]

This is on purpose.

The `leisure=pitch` is for the baseball field itself, while the encompassing `leisure=sports_centre` is for the “whole baseball location” including bleachers, related buildings such as locker rooms, associated fences not tightly wrapping the baseball playing field itself, dedicated toilets, restaurants, dugouts, bullpens, drinking fountains and so on.

I've taken this problem of creating an explicit “relation” between the baseball pitch and its “facilities” to the community a couple of weeks ago and though there seems to be no perfect way for indicating the relationship, `leisure=sports_centre` appears to be the de facto standard for smaller soccer grounds in Europe with the same constraints. See the discussion on
https://www.reddit.com/r/openstreetmap/comments/15j677l/mapping_smaller_baseball_grounds_with_facilities/ if you're interested.

Have a great weekend,

Hello Graptemys,

[This looks like a description, not a name]

I've been OSM'ing tens of baseball fields in Québec in the last month or so and this way of organizing things appeared to me as the most logical, useful and practical; feel free to suggest better approaches. Let me explain.

In this very case at Parc du Père-Marquette, the “name” is more of a description, I agree.

But in the many cases where there are multiple baseball fields (with different sizes and features) in the same park, locals will refer to them as “baseball park 1”, “baseball park 2”, and so on. See for instance https://www.baseballstleonard.com/index.php/jarry-3-park

There are also cases where there are multiple baseball fields, only one which has a specific name, like at Parc Clair Matin way/174494788

For sake of consistency across baseball parks, I've decided to give them all name.

Also to take into consideration for that naming of “anonymous” baseball parks: while mapping those baseball fields in OSM I've been adding cross-references to Wikidata entries for many, such as https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q121402244 which is a distinct entity from the park (which would be https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q22482810 in this case) and each entity needs a name. OSM iD will automagically pull the name from Wikidata, and that name will likely be worse (as it will often include the name of the parent park) than the generic “baseball park”.

[the feature is now duplicated]

I don't understand; what is duplicated, can you please rephrase this to help me?

[what is the restaurant=no tag for]

It is somewhat expected for baseball park visitors, which will tend to remain on-site for a few hours while watching a game, to find some kind of snack bar and/or toilets and/or drinking fountains among its amenities, just like it is somewhat expected for a visitor to find a washroom at a gas station or a restaurant at a casino.

The indication there is no restaurant (or no toilet) is thus, I think, useful. The point is that it is, at least in spirit, similar to the `wheelchair`=* attribute as it can make or break a decision to visit the baseball grounds.