[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)
pla16021 at gmail.com
Wed Oct 24 16:50:48 UTC 2018
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 5:27 PM Allan Mustard <allan at mustard.net> wrote:
I have no idea why amenity=embassy first came into existence.
The usual reasons. Somebody needed to tag an embassy, couldn't find a
documented way of
doing it so used the first tag that came to mind.
There is another proposal to create amenity=diplomatic and then use the
> diplomatic=* tag to define more precisely what type of facility an object
> is. I have added it to the proposal wiki, but assume you would not like
> it, either.
Not under amenity, no. Maybe it works for other people, but my mental map
of what constitutes
an amenity doesn't include embassies and consulates. Even though embassies
both sometimes hold parties.
Paul, are you proposing office=diplomatic and diplomatic=[embassy, mission,
> nunciature, consulate, consulate_general, consular agency,
> honorary_consul], or something else?
Something along those lines. I'm not sure office is a good fit either. We
and office=doctor but there are attempts to move those under healthcare,
which I think is a better
way of handling them. I definitely don't like amenity here and office is
only slightly better. A better
fit would be diplomatic_mission=consulate|embassy|nunciate|whatever but
underscores in keys
seem to be out of favour. Is there another encompassing term?
> As for objection to the service=* tag, would a new consular:*=* tag be a
> better solution? Just asking. I'm not well versed in programing editors.
> It would be something like consular:immigrant_visas=yes,
> consular:nonimmigrant_visas=yes, consular:citizen_services=yes, etc.
Only if there is no need for an equivalent embassy: tag. That is
everything that need be dealt with
for an embassy is listing which consular functions it also performs (if
any). This assumes an
underlying model where an embassy can (but may not) do anything a consulate
can but all
embassies have the same non-consular functions. Otherwise, if we had an
term like diplomatic_mission=* we could then have
something like that. I'm making this up as I go along. :)
As for whether embassies serve "any purpose other than housing spies," as a
> diplomat now for over 30 years, I can assure you that at least in the case
> of U.S. embassies, we diplomats do a lot more than that.
That's how it worked until recent times. Now diplomacy-by-tweet seems to
be the norm in the US. :(
However, your experience does mean you have a good idea of what the tagging
scheme needs to
cover so it can be made coherent and possibly anticipate future needs.
It's always a pain to introduce
a new way of doing things and then find out a year down the line that it
can't handle something.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging