[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Feature Name)

Joseph Eisenberg joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Thu Jun 20 06:06:43 UTC 2019

I agree that this discussion should be in 5 different threads, one for
each tag, so I will respond in that way, and on the individual pages.

In general, I appreciate the work that you are doing on this, but I
don't think you should rely too much on the abandoned healthcare 2.0
proposal - it wasn't very well though out.

I'm a physician from the USA who lives in eastern Indonesia, and I'd
be happy to give some help to this project if you want to contact me

On 6/20/19, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 20/06/19 08:55, marc marc wrote:
>> Hello,
>> Le 19.06.19 à 22:17, Mhairi O'Hara a écrit :
>>> Hello Tagging Mailing List,
>> imho you request too many comment in one email,
>> the thread 'll soon become unmanageable
> +1
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:staff_count:doctors
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:staff_count:nurses
>> there is a difficulty in using osm for volatile data: should the value
>> in osm be changed each time a staff member is on vacation? or should
>> the definition of the tag be changed to say that it describes the
>> average value outside of a particular event? but in this case, if the
>> amenity double its staff temporarily for an event, how will the user
>> know this since the average value does not take it into account ?
> The data is not that volatile. Temporary staff comes in where that is
> necessary, usually for smaller facilities.
> Larger facilities shuffle staff around as they can with larger numbers.
>> for the tag itself, a more common namespace would have been
>> doctors:count or doctors:avg:count (or :capacity if it's about
>> the capacity)
> Staff:*=* could be used in more places. So I think that is a better
> approach.
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:operational_status
>> amenity=toilets for a closed toilets is an exemple of bad tagging.
>> see
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/Tag:operational_status#Shares_the_same_problems_as_the_old_styles_of_using_disused.2Fabandoned
>> but the tag itself is an improvement for "not fully closed" amenity.
> I would use the description key for these temporary things. Has the
> advantage of already implemented and infinatly variable.
>>> [4]
>>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:health_amenity:type
>> please check the approved and 10x more used
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:healthcare
>> what's new/diff in your propal ? the previous propal said
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Healthcare_2.0#What_healthcare.3D.2A_is_lacking
>> but you are talking about taginfo usage but nearly all of them
>> have already a "more in used tag"
>> you also said "speciality medical equipment", but some of them aren't
>> an equipement (psychologist, dentist,...) so it's very unclear what
>> you want todo, just valid the tag without any value ? bad idea.
>> show the need that existing tag miss, not an "openbar" rational.
> Possibly a 'service' key .. but not the word service as that is in too much
> use and maybe confused with other things?
> However, the services offered will be limited by the equipment available so
> it maybe better to limit the tagging to that?
> e.g. Dental_Engine, MRI, Xray, operating_theatre ???
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

More information about the Tagging mailing list