[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*
61sundowner at gmail.com
Sat Mar 9 23:58:06 UTC 2019
On 10/03/19 09:10, Jan S wrote:
> Am 9. März 2019 22:34:39 MEZ schrieb marc marc <marc_marc_irc at hotmail.com>:
>> police:name : it's not what should be in operator or network ?
or simply use the name=* tag?
>> police:type : type is a no-meaning tag despite I currently no idea for
>> good name.
I think you have police:specialisation=* to indicate special services within the police e.g. highway patrol, air patrol, dog unit,
'Type' could be taken as anything and often is.
>> I also fail to understand the dif with police:name.
>> what's the police:name of CRS ?
>> what's the police:type of NYPD ?
> Thanks for your observations. I'll collect more opinions on the abolition of amenity=police.
> I've added some tagging examples to the proposal, so I hope that the concept is clearer now.
Yes .. collect ideas. Select the better ones and see where it goes.
More information about the Tagging