[Tagging] Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - childcare

M∡rtin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue May 10 12:59:33 BST 2011

2011/5/10 Flaimo <flaimo at gmail.com>:

> Further, i too consider the social facility tags to negative. Besides
> that, i couldn't see a social_facility=* value that would fit. the
> "or=child" part references to an target audience, which would
> correspond more to the "age" tag of my proposal and not the
> amenity=childcare.

Actually I perceive as well some reference to class struggle,
especially in the introduction of the linked wikipedia article:
"pursuit of social welfare, social change and social justice". I
suggest to remove this reference, as it is not even helpful in its
generic definition, and "social change", "social justice" and to some
point also welfare are not about what it is, but why it is (so it
belongs to philosophy / politics / economy and not to OSM). It is also
not helpful to have the basic definition ("A social facility is any
place where social services, as defined here, are conducted:") linked
to a dynamic page ;-), and I think in OSM we could well live without
the "as defined here" part.

Given all this I agree that there is not yet a suggested value, but
there is daycare as an example: "social_facility:for=child	 e.g.
daycare center for children", i.e. following the logics of the cited
page there would be social_facility=daycare, social_facility:for=child
to be amended.

Following the logics of your proposal instead, there could be an
amendment to your proposal saying that daycare should be removed from
the example section of social_facility:for (or a link to your tag
added. Removing "daycare" from social_facility would not be a problem
because there is not yet a single object with this tag in the database
(according to taginfo),


More information about the Tagging mailing list