[Tagging] Public buildings

[Daniel Koć]

W dniu 10.01.2016 0:20, Tom Pfeifer napisał(a):

> Both 'amenity=public_building' and 'building=public' are problematic,

Sure.

> but for different reasons. Merging their wiki representations mixes the
> arguments against both, and makes improvements even more difficult.
> 
> 'amenity=public_building' is an unspecific use of the amenity key, and
> should be replaced with a more specific value.
> 
> 'building=public' describes some form of accessibility using a key
> that should describe the architectural type of a building.

Just for the record: "accessibility" brings some unwanted connection 
with "access" key, which we're not discussing now, as far as I 
understand.

You could be right, but IIRC when discussing church example I was once 
told that it's not that building=church+amenity=museum is about 
describing form (building) and function (amenity), as I thought. And 
indeed, we have some pretty popular tags like building=retail (~200k 
uses), which is mixing these two factors.

But if we really want to separate form and function, it would be better 
to not have something "amenity=public_building" (rather "amenity=yes" in 
general, when in doubt), while "building=public" sounds more reasonable 
for me (general category for building types other than for private 
people to live in).

-- 
"Завтра, завтра всё кончится!" [Ф. Достоевский]