Does this pitch have a net?

[vfosnar]

General

Affected tag(s) to be modified/added: Question asked: Is there an example tag on item XY?

Checklist

Checklist for quest suggestions (see guidelines):

• [ ] 🚧 To be added tag is established and has a useful purpose - has a purpose but currently has 489 uses
• [x] 🤔 Any answer the user can give must have an equivalent tagging (Quest should not reappear to other users when solved by one)
• [x] 🐿️ Easily answerable by any pedestrian from the outside but a survey is necessary
• [ ] 💤 Not an overwhelming percentage of quests have the same answer (No spam) - depends, in my country ~80% would be no but I think the quest would be worth the effort
• [x] 🕓 Applies to a reasonable number of map data (Worth the effort)

Ideas for implementation

Element selection:

leisure=pitch and sport~=^...$ and !pitch:net

Metadata needed:

Proposed UI:

Does this pitch have a net? yes | no

[paulklie]

Isn't this information already added by adding the sport tag? Like if sport=soccer or basket_ball can't we already assume that pitch:net=no and if sport=netball can't we assume that pitch:net=yes?

[mnalis]

TL;DR: I'd say not worth it; too much work for user, too little use of the tag, and not a very good tag anyway.

---

The wiki says for yes:

There is a net available at the sports pitch (but not necessarily installed as it may be stored locally and ready for use).

which IMHO makes it problematic for SC, due to:

• 👨‍💻 Users are no experts: No knowledge about OpenStreetMap or any other background knowledge must be necessary
• 🐿️ Easy answer: Users are out and about and impatient. A quick, straightforward and clear answer must be possible

How is user passing by some pitch and seeing it missed the net supposed to know whether:

• the net is missing because it is just currently stored, or
• because it is not available at all?

They would have to find the operator and ask them, and that makes it too complex IMHO for StreetComplete (and also - at least partly - fails general OSM verifiability principle, as it does not document what is on the ground, but alleged reason why the situation on the ground is such, and that maybe be unverifiable or hard to verify)

---

Also, I have doubts about the usability of that tag generally. IMHO if e.g. tennis court or valleyball pitch is missing a net, it is not really usable for that sport.

So I'd say in such case it is not leisure=pitch + sport=tennis + pitch:net=no, but should instead get disused:* (or even abandoned:*) lifecycle prefix.

Only exception when the pitch:net=* tag makes sense for me is for table tennis (ping-pong), where net might be missing because users are expected to buy and bring their own net[^1]. But that isn't the case for all the other purported uses of the tag[^2]

[^1]: yeah that is a thing is some countries [^2]: at least I've never heard of needing to bring your own volleyball net etc.

[vfosnar]

Isn't this information already added by adding the sport tag?

but should instead get disused:* (or even abandoned:*) lifecycle

No, it's common for pitches in my area to have a bring your own net policy. That's why having such info would be useful for example for planning to go play voleyball.

the net is missing because it is just currently stored, or

This is not common here and when it happens it's at obvious places like sport centers, but you're right this makes it not a good quest for SC.

[westnordost]

No, it's common for pitches in my area to have a bring your own net policy. That's why having such info would be useful for example for planning to go play voleyball.

I see. So, for certain sports it might be useful to ask (in certain regions). Weird though, a volleyball net is quite large, it's not something anyone would have just lying around. To me it sounds like a very unusual setup.

A few more notes:

1. What sports do you have in mind, other than (beach) volleyball?

2. To ask about a bring-your-own-net policy would only work for pitches that are definitely public (and free). However, it is not clear how these would (need to) be mapped to distinguish them from pitches that belong to some sports club, sports center or otherwise are "managed" (i.e. usually require a fee)

[westnordost]

From the ticket you created as SCEE:

note: Keep in mind if the net is stored the answer should be Yes anyway.

And how would a surveyor ascertain that? Also, where does this statement come from? I haven't read anything about that in the wiki, or I skipped it.

[vfosnar]

Weird though, a volleyball net is quite large, it's not something anyone would have just lying around. To me it sounds like a very unusual setup.

I think the idea was that every pitch would have one but no-one from the city wanted to maintain it. Some schools bring their own net but most of the time the pitch is just used for soccer instead (that's also why I'm against using the disused prefix).

And how would a surveyor ascertain that?

Probably has to ask someone, or at least respond with no in case there is nothing where a net could be stored around. I know this falls apart on edge cases but in case of my town this quest would be perfectly answerable in 95% of cases. This is probably not good for SC but I assume could be ok with SCEE.

Also, where does this statement come from?

from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:pitch:net I did not see this section when creating the issue

pitch:net=yes: There is a net available at the sports pitch (but not necessarily installed as it may be stored locally and ready for use).

[mnalis]

TL;DR: well, given the explanation, it might be OK (as disabled by default quest) after all, if extra quest asking whether pitch is open for public is created.

---

I see. So, for certain sports it might be useful to ask (in certain regions). Weird though, a volleyball net is quite large, it's not something anyone would have just lying around. To me it sounds like a very unusual setup.

For me too, but apparently, that is a thing in certain parts of the world (in @vfosnar experience and also looking at original proposal votes). 🤷‍♂️ That would change the situation, then...

A few more notes:

1. What sports do you have in mind, other than (beach) volleyball?

Wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:pitch:net states: volleyball, beachvolleyball, tennis, table_tennis, badminton

2. To ask about a bring-your-own-net policy would only work for pitches that are definitely public (and free). 
   However, it is not clear how these would (need to) be mapped

It is not mentioned on that wiki page, but its proposal had in rationale:

the unavailability of a net can be explicitly tagged with pitch:net=no, which in combination with access=yes indicates that this is a public pitch where you have to bring your own net

(relatedly, it is interesting that this accepted proposal from 2022 has an initial intention to have StreetComplete quest be used to complete it explicitly mentioned 😸 , but it took several years for someone to actually suggest it)

Given all that, I guess it might be OK for StreetComplete if:

• we first create a quest "Who is allowed to use this pitch?" (in the same manner as we have "Who is allowed to use this playground?"), which is useful Quest in itself (some 178k / 6.75% of the pitches have access=* tagged already) - or update existing quest to cover both
• "Does this pitch have a net?" is asked only on leisure=pitch and sport ~ volleyball|beachvolleyball|tennis|table_tennis|badminton and access=yes and the quest is disabled by default (probably default_disabled_msg_go_inside)

[westnordost]

Hm, the wiki page for leisure=swimming_pool states that public swimming pools (that require an entrance fee of course) should be tagged with access=yes. Translating this to other leisure sport facilities, this would mean that beach volleyball courts within a sports center (that require entrance fee, or even being a sort of club membership??) would also be tagged with access=yes?

[vfosnar]

not sure about the club membership, but in case it's available for the general public (even with a fee) it does make sense-

[mnalis]

Hm, the wiki page for leisure=swimming_pool states that public swimming pools (that require an entrance fee of course) should be tagged with access=yes.

Makes sense to me. Like a public parking lot that requires paying a fee is also access=yes + fee=yes (there might be other conditions on access=yes places too, like e.g. min_age=* / max_age=* / min_height=* etc. ; it does not mean that access=yes is wrong / incompatible tag IMHO)

Translating this to other leisure sport facilities, this would mean that beach volleyball courts within a sports center (that require entrance fee [...] would also be tagged with access=yes?

Yes, I'd say it is also access=yes + fee=yes

or even being a sort of club membership

Not that one. It if it requires club membership, then it would be access=private + private=members. I also wouldn't add fee=* in such case (regardless if you have to pay to gain club membership or not). (see related membership=required wiki too)

[westnordost]

Tag fee=yes on every single pitch within a sports center?

[mnalis]

Tag fee=yes on every single pitch within a sports center?

If you have to pay for each of them individually, yes -- I'd add fee=yes on every leisure=pitch. (e.g. if paying for ping pong table does not allow you to use basketball court)

But if you only have to pay to enter the facility, and then can use anything in there (providing it is currently unoccupied) without limitation and additional payments, then I'd put fee=yes only on leisure=sports_centre polygon, and mark every leisure=pitch inside just with access=customers.

[westnordost]

Well, I guess the quest should rather exclude any pitches that are within any leisure=sports_centre.

Also, I think it should be limited to regions where this is common, at least for starters (Czechia?) because, well, at least in my area it would be very spammy. Also, after this quest is implemented and quests have been solved, it may turn out that even in Czechia it would be very spammy. That would mean that the quest should probably be deleted again.

Also, only ask for certain pitches that have a net and are without fee and open to the public.

Then, this quest could be implemented. I still doubt somewhat if it is worth the effort, but I am not going to stop others from implementing it.