[Tagging] University accommodation (was Re: Future proposal - RFC - amenity=dormitory)

[Dan S]

2014-09-19 16:15 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>:

>
> 2014-09-19 14:22 GMT+02:00 Dan S <danstowell+osm at gmail.com>:
>
>>
>>  for buildings:   building=residential + residential=university +
>> operator=*
>>         OR
>>  for sites:   landuse=residential + residential=university + operator=*
>>
>> Note that the same scheme seems to me to work well for building and for
>> landuse.
>
>
>
> I am not sure if this "works". Have you been looking at current values for
> the "residential" key? These are the ones with more than 100 uses:
>
> rural <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/residential=rural>
> 78 141
>
> -
>
> urban <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/residential=urban>
> 12 698
>
> -
>
> garden <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/residential=garden>
> 3 805
>
> -
>
> gated <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/residential=gated>
> 884
>
> -
>
> apartments <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/residential=apartments>
> 231
>
> -
>
> single_family
> <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/residential=single_family>
> 197
>
> -
>
> detached <http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/residential=detached>
> 133
>
>
>

Thanks Martin. Yes I did look at these. NONE of them have a wiki page, nor
does the residential=* tag in general, so I'm at a loss to work out what is
intended by them!

* Surely the rural/urban distinction is judged by location? Could you have
residential=rural in the town centre? Maybe (since the tag isn't
documented) but I would guess not. So what's the tag for? Does it designate
context, building style, building density...?

* Surely apartments/detached/single_family should be properties of the
building objects?

* residential=garden I quite like, but it seems to duplicate leisure=garden
and it seems strange to me to consider gardens as "residential" since
usually no-one lives in the garden. I wonder if it was ever discussed much.

* residential=gated I like. In theory you can use barrier=* and access=* to
indicate the unusual access constraints for gated residences, but actually
it's not always obvious as that, since non-gated communities might also
have fences etc. So this tag seems to me like it might make a useful
distinction.



> There are already at least 3 different systems (one for rural / urban and
> one for the building typology (detached / single_family / apartments) and
> one for gated communities (what's this, socio-economic aspect of urbanism
> maybe?). Now you seem to be adding yet another one, "university" for
> student's appartments (not really self explaining IMHO).
>

So if not self-explaining, what misunderstandings of
"residential=university" could happen? It seems quite self-explaining to
me, so I'd be grateful if you could offer your perspective of potential
misunderstandings of "residential=university".



> I would use a specific tag for the building typology (e.g.
> building=dormitory or student_accomodation or similar if the building was
> built as such) and another one if it is actually used as such (e.g. under
> the amenity key as suggested by Tobias).
>

Understood. For the building, at least, the subtag works, if used to
indicate building typology.



> I don't see this as a case for adding a specific landuse value, but I do
> agree that refining the generic "residential" into more differentiated
> values by subtagging might be a general option (regardless of this
> particular case of student accomodation), e.g. differentiate according to
> density and
>
> structure (open / closed, not sure about the precise term in English, for
> reference see these two pictures:
> open (=space between buildings)
> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offene_Bauweise_%28Baurecht%29#mediaviewer/File:Offene_Bauweise.png
> closed (buildings without space between them):
> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geschlossene_Bauweise_%28Baurecht%29#mediaviewer/File:Geschlossene_Bauweise.png
>

In British English this seems to me to  "detached" vs "semi-detached" vs
"terrace" (though there's not a 1:1 concept match). Again, though, it's not
clear to me why you'd want to tag residential areas as having these
properties, since they're already commonly indicated via the tags/geometry
of the building objects.

Thanks again for your detailed reply.

Best
Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20140921/751dce04/attachment-0001.html>