[Tagging] confusing wiki on emergency

joost schouppe joost.schouppe at gmail.com
Tue Oct 31 09:00:21 UTC 2017

Hi Mateusz,

Of course a single bad link is not enough. I also didn't realize how many
objects are already tagged with emergency=yes.

I've never liked the way access is implied on all the specific tags, where
we write access:bicycle as bicycle. IMHO, it makes the tagging scheme more
complicated to understand for a new mapper.
Since emergency can be used in two different ways, it makes it harder to
get an idea of what values are used in the access sence and which in the
amenity sense. Theoretically, you could have a road which has both some
sensible emergency-amenity AND emergency-access. I haven't seen many of
those though, e.g. I guess you could consider a road also tagged as an
ambulance_station or a coastal_defence as simple mistakes.

Looking at the values used in the context of emergency, I do think there's
need for some decent documentation. The general access values don't mention
things like ambulance, fire_fighters, fire_truck etc.). In the spirit of
other access tags, I suppose these should rather be ambulance=yes instead
of emergency=ambulance.

2017-10-31 9:26 GMT+01:00 Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at gmail.com>:

> *separate section for meaning
> On 31 Oct 2017 8:24 a.m., "Mateusz Konieczny" <matkoniecz at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> Single bad link on wiki is not a good reason for mass edit worldwide,
> changing all editors, changing all data consumers, changing habits of all
> users using this tag, introducing confusing and unusual prefix (it is not
> like OSM tagging scheme requires more confusing things) and changing all
> pages on wiki describing this tag.
> Just fix the bad link, separate section four meaning as an access tag
> makes sense.
> On 30 Oct 2017 11:08 a.m., "joost schouppe" <joost.schouppe at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On the access page, there is a described use for emergency=* . However,
>> when you click through, you get to a page to a tag that describes all sorts
>> of amenities related to emergency.
>> Would this be a reason to retag emergency when related to access as the
>> implied tag access:emergency=*, and then make a new wiki page about
>> access:emergency ? Or would it be enough to add a section to the
>> emergency=* wiki page to explain that it can ALSO be used as an implied
>> access:emergency tag?
>> --
>> Joost Schouppe
>> OpenStreetMap <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/> |
>> Twitter <https://twitter.com/joostjakob> | LinkedIn
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joost-schouppe/48/939/603> | Meetup
>> <http://www.meetup.com/OpenStreetMap-Belgium/members/97979802/>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Joost Schouppe
OpenStreetMap <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/joost%20schouppe/> |
Twitter <https://twitter.com/joostjakob> | LinkedIn
<https://www.linkedin.com/pub/joost-schouppe/48/939/603> | Meetup
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20171031/edd11212/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list