[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (consulate)
dieterdreist at gmail.com
Wed Oct 31 09:11:45 UTC 2018
Am Mi., 31. Okt. 2018 um 02:41 Uhr schrieb Allan Mustard <allan at mustard.net
> Nobody wants to be called "minor" in diplomacy. Wars have been fought
> over lesser insults. If that's the only other suggestion, then my proposal
> will remain "other" :-o
The head of the OSCE mission here in Ashgabat is a former ambassador and
> will certainly take umbrage with me if her mission is somehow described as
I agree that minor may not be a good term if we want everybody to embrace
the tag. In my opinion, "other" is not acceptable as a key for something as
specific as the subtype of diplomatic missions which aren't either
embassies nor consulates. It is far too broad. "other_mission" would come
close to "other" but would give some indication on the context (maybe there
remains some ambiguity, because "mission" is used in different context too).
> if these are all exclusive, it could also be:
>> amenity=[embassy, consulate, minor_mission]
> I think we are past the point of calling diplomatic missions "amenity".
> We're now down to either "office=diplomatic" or "diplomatic=*" There has
> been broad consensus expressed that diplomatic missions are not amenities.
While I still don't see a problem with amenity (the key is currently a home
for monasteries, churches, temples, mosques, hospitals, schools,
pharmacies, post offices, grave yards, pubs, police stations, townhalls,
community_centres, social_facilities, dentists, marketplaces, bus stations,
theatres, universities, courthouses, banks, embassies, prisons...), I could
live with office=diplomatic as well, while introducing a new main tag would
probably lead to disruption and would be a good way to ensure that
amenity=embassy never goes away (which it maybe won't anyway, people will
likely add additional tags and retain the amenity=embassy tag).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging