[Tagging] community centres

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/9/28 Pierre-Alain Dorange <pdorange at mac.com>:
> Sean Horgan <seanhorgan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> agreed.  there should be no restriction on who owns/provides the service.
>
> Yes but then we must provide operator=*


yes, we should encourage the use of operator, which might not be the
same as proprietor though. It could be that the operation of the
service is assigned to a private company, but the proprietor is
public. Like for fuel stations we might need different subtags for
this, and we should define the roles in the wiki.

Looking at "operator" in the wiki, there is really no definition, just
longish local examples: "Often it's useful to describe that a certain
map object "belongs" to a company or corporation in any way. For
example: With the emerging of private postal service providers, it may
be of interest for the map user which postal services provider
operates a certain post_box. For example, in Germany there are already
some private companies like PIN or Stadtbrief who install their own
post boxes. Who wants to ship a letter has to choose the post box of
"his" postal service provider. Other examples are pub, restaurant and
hotel chains, maybe also streets maintained by private companies where
a fee is required. "

OK, found it below, in "examples": "The operator tag could be used to
name a company or corporation (also a person???) who's responsible for
a certain map object or who operates it. "

what about changing this to "The operator tag is used to name a
company, corporation, person or any other entity who is in charge of
the operation of a certain map object" and putting it on top of the
page. We could then put the stuff quoted above below "examples".

any objections?

Cheers,
Martin