Talk:Tag:golf=hole

How to tag

Handicap of the hole? And length - usually different for different tee positions. Should the way representing a hole contain all tees?

We cannot draw a hole for every tee. That could be 4 ways to one pin. That's too much to me. I draw all tees as area and use the furthest for the hole. An example: [1] . But wait a few days, it is not rendered every day. --geozeisig (talk) 09:41, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Course Names

Many clubs have multiple courses, usually a combination of 18 & 9 holes. Often, each have a different name. As there's the (correct) decision to discourage usage of the 'name' tag on a hole, I think there should be a separate tag to distinguish. Something like: course_name=*. --DaveF63 (talk) 10:11, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

I agree. Holes should be tagged with the course they are part of to allow for a clear distinguishment. --Dsfarc (talk) 12:54, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

We have golf:course:name (today 4,655 counts) and course:name (today 1,194 counts) and course_name (today 36 counts). Please use the first two keys (in my personal opinion, the first value would be golf:course:name). User 5359 (talk) 13:13, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

I agree with the use of golf:course:name. Should this be added to the tag's page? --Dsfarc (talk) 17:56, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

There's something about the flattened key names with multiple colons that bothers me. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I prefer the "sport=golf -> golf=hole -> ..." type of hierarchy. I'd like to see more discussion about appropriate key names as putting the course into the name is clearly wrong. I plan on fixing all the holes that improperly have course names in the name tag in 2026 (in the US at least), so guidance is much appreciated. B-jazz (talk) 18:06, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Malle_Yeno on the OSM US Slack channel brought up a good suggestion. Make use of the ref and put "South 1" there instead of creating yet another key. This seems to follow things like "ref=US 101" for highways, so it seems appropriate. B-jazz (talk) 19:02, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

The road is indeed called US 101, but is the hole really "South 1"? Best not to synthesize ref=*
—— Kovposch (talk) 19:52, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Mixing two pieces of information on one key has never been a good idea (except for people who subsequently write data quality programs). The example with the street reference is a misinterpreted example. User 5359 (talk) 19:09, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

I would like to repeat a suggestion from @Kovposch on the Golf course discussion page: how about a route relation which is applied to the holes? By creating a route=golf tag and name=<course name> that would solve the immediate issue in an elegant way that builds on existing OSM practice. --Dsfarc (talk) 19:58, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

I suggested type=circuit , but it seemed to not get popular Proposal_talk:Circuit#circuit_relation_vs_route_subtype Talk:Relation:route#route=raceway?
The cases discussed originally should be assessed Talk:Tag:leisure=golf_course#Multiple_Named_Courses_in_a_club
golf:course:name=* works for 1 only. 2, 3, 4 with different orders, combined courses, and alternative setups favors route=golf as a self-ordered list.
—— Kovposch (talk) 19:50, 9 October 2025 (UTC)