<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 21:03, Warin <<a href="mailto:61sundowner@gmail.com">61sundowner@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div>On 07/10/19 19:57, Andrew Harvey wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>I added this to the ATG as amenity=community_centre +
community_centre:for=man,</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
'man' may mean both men and women. On the other hand it maybe the
original use was for males only. I think the value is not good. <br>
There are only 4 uses of the community_centre:for=man in the data
base. I would prefer a different value... with a clear meaning. <br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes, but in this context I think it's pretty please it's for males not persons. I didn't create that tag, it was already documented at <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:community_centre:for">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:community_centre:for</a>.</div><div><br></div><div>I think we should use Key:community_centre:for rather than Key:gender because per the wiki "The community_centre:for tag is used to describe the group of people that is primarily served by the facility, when it is distinguished by age or gender." <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:community_centre:for">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:community_centre:for</a></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div> <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Australian_Tagging_Guidelines&type=revision&diff=1856025&oldid=1855758" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Australian_Tagging_Guidelines&type=revision&diff=1856025&oldid=1855758</a>.
Not saying we need to follow, this if the discussion leads
elsewhere it can be updated.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>To me it seems more like a community centre for men than a
club.</div>
<div>I don't think this warrants it's own tag.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Since there's a wikipedia page, there's a wikidata tag, I
wonder if we should use operator:wikidata or brand:wikidata to
link these all together?</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
brand rather than operator? I am not certain where the funding comes
from, some from members contributions. <br>
I'd think each shed has some control over their operations .. so
tagging the operator might give the wrong impression? <br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes I was leaning more towards brand too.</div></div></div>