[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - health_amenity:type

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Fri Jul 26 02:29:25 UTC 2019


On 26/07/19 10:19, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> There are still 2  problems with healthcare:equipment:
And how many with health_amenity:type ?
>
> 1) Healthcare:equipment is yet another new feature key for database 
> users to support, if tagged on its own node at the location of the 
> MRI. This requires Osm20gsql users like the main Openstreetmap-Carto 
> style to reload the whole planet database before this key can be 
> supported for rendering, routing or search applications. Using 
> amenity=MRI or healthcare=MRI would be easier for current database 
> users to support and it’s shorter for mappers to type.

Not all users will want to support heath care.
While it may be easy in the short term to place everything into the 
amenity key or some other key this creates problems in the long term. 
And, even if placed into these other keys, support may still not be given.

> 2) If you want to add this as a tag to an amenity=hospital, then you 
> can’t add both an MRI and a CT scanner, for example, since a key can 
> only have one value.

Not true, a few keys support multiple values e.g. 
sport=soccer;rugby;baseball

>
> So in that case you still need MRI=yes as an addition key to tag on an 
> existing facility. I suspect this tagging will be more common than 
> mapping the MRI separately, and it certainly will be more common for 
> ultrasounds, which are on wheels (casters) usually and can move around 
> the hospital.

In the first instance I think you are correct in that this will be 
popular as a sub tag under a hospital (or other =feature).
And I think most renders will ignore these sub tags of whatever method.

I would think portable equipment would not be tagged. Much like cars.
Doctors, nurses and portable equipment can be transported in. And can be 
changed fairly quickly, not something that OSM handles well.
An MRI is not so easy to transport and get working.


>
> Joseph
>
> On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 4:01 AM Mhairi O'Hara <mhairi.ohara at hotosm.org 
> <mailto:mhairi.ohara at hotosm.org>> wrote:
>
>     Hello everyone!
>
>     I completely agree with Warin that the *health_amenity:type* tag
>     is pretty confusing as to what its referring to. I was trying to
>     stay in line with what was proposed previously, but in retrospect
>     it would be better to move away from previous efforts and vote in
>     a tag that is straight forward and easy to understand (says what
>     it is).
>
>     The main aim for the tag is to encapsulate that its related to
>     health equipment, so how about *healthcare:equipment*?
>
>     Kind regards,
>
>     Mhairi
>
>     On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 4:43 PM Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com
>     <mailto:61sundowner at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         This is about the equipment available?
>
>         Using the principle of 'say what it is' ...
>
>         medical_equipment=MRI ??? Assuming the tag is for equipment.
>
>         Calling the key health_amenity:type "in use" is a stretch - 40
>         uses .. and most of these are for first aid kits!
>         The next most popular is "scales".
>         Fist aid kits have the tag emergency=first_aid_kit ... which
>         is more popular (170) despite it being a "draft".
>
>         No, I don't think is is "in use" nor has it been used in a
>         sensible way. Probably because "type" can mean anything.
>
>         health_facility:type has the same problem, despite being more
>         popular, uses are for
>         dispensary
>         office
>         clinic
>         hospital
>         etc
>
>
>         On 14/07/19 23:18, François Lacombe wrote:
>>         Hi Mark,
>>
>>         I agree with your choice to specifiy which service are
>>         available in a given facility.
>>         This doesn't require to add :type in the name of the key.
>>         Such suffixe don't bring any information.
>>         Your proposal would be way better if you use
>>         health_amenit=MRI at least instead
>>
>>         All the best
>>
>>         François
>>
>>         Le jeu. 11 juil. 2019 à 21:10, Mark Herringer
>>         <mark at healthsites.io <mailto:mark at healthsites.io>> a écrit :
>>
>>             The intention of the tag is to specify physical equipment
>>             (health_amenity:type=MRI) and should be used in
>>             conjunction with amenity=clinic to show that the health
>>             facility contains that specialised equipment. This will
>>             enable mappers say that "this clinic contains an MRI"
>>>>
>>             On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 at 08:15, Joseph Eisenberg
>>             <joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
>>             <mailto:joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>                 4) health_amenity:type
>>
>>                 I think the key "healthcare" should be used instead
>>                 of the new key
>>                 health_amenity:type". If it's necessary to tag an MRI
>>                 facility
>>                 separately, then create a tag like "healthcare=mri".
>>
>>                  However, it may be more useful to use a tag like
>>                 "mri=yes" on the
>>                 main amenity=hospital or the radiology department
>>                 within the medical
>>                 centre - this tag would let mappers say that "this
>>                 hospital contains
>>                 an MRI" without requiring mappers to precisely locate
>>                 the MRI
>>                 equipment within the building. This would also make
>>                 it easier for
>>                 database users: they can just check for
>>                 "amenity=hospital" + "mri=yes"
>>                 rather than doing a spacial query to find MRI nodes
>>                 within or near an
>>                 amenity=hospital feature
>>
>>
>>                 On 6/20/19, Mhairi O'Hara <mhairi.ohara at hotosm.org
>>                 <mailto:mhairi.ohara at hotosm.org>> wrote:
>>                 > Hello Tagging Mailing List,
>>                 >
>>                 > We would like to bring your attention and comments
>>                 on the proposal for the
>>                 > staff_count:doctors and staff_count:nurses tags,
>>                 which helps identify the
>>                 > number of doctors and nurses at a given health
>>                 facility [1][2]. The
>>                 > operational_status tag, which has been proposed
>>                 before and I would like to
>>                 > highlight again, as this is used to document an
>>                 observation of the current
>>                 > functional status of a mapped feature (i.e. health
>>                 facility) [3]. The
>>                 > health_amenity:type tag is also being proposed, as
>>                 this indicates what type
>>                 > of speciality medical equipment is available at the
>>                 health facility [4] and
>>                 > the final tag is insurance:health which describes
>>                 the type of health
>>                 > insurance accepted at a health facility [5].
>>                 >
>>                 > Some of these are already in use but have never
>>                 been formally accepted, or
>>                 > properly described as to how they should be
>>                 applied, which we would like to
>>                 > try and achieve if possible for the Healthsites.io
>>                 project. Please take a
>>                 > look at the proposal pages on the OSM Wiki, as well
>>                 as the Global
>>                 > Healthsites Mapping Project page [2] which is at
>>                 the core of the recent
>>                 > work focused on creating a health facility data
>>                 model. We look forward to
>>                 > discussing these proposals on the respective Wiki
>>                 discussion pages.
>>                 >
>>                 > Kind regards,
>>                 >
>>                 > Mhairi
>>                 >
>>                 > [1]
>>                 >
>>                 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:staff_count:doctors
>>                 > [2]
>>                 >
>>                 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:staff_count:nurses
>>                 > [3]
>>                 >
>>                 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:operational_status
>>                 > [4]
>>                 >
>>                 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:health_amenity:type
>>                 > [5]
>>                 >
>>                 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:insurance:health
>>                 > [6]
>>                 >
>>                 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Global_Healthsites_Mapping_Project#Tag_Proposal
>>                 >
>>                 >
>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190726/3b7ee7bb/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list