[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

Tony Shield tony.shield999 at gmail.com
Fri Mar 15 09:17:36 UTC 2019

Agreed - don't change the meaning. If additional information is required 
- and I'm not sure why - then additional police=* tag is a good 
alternate to the Amenity tag.


On 15/03/2019 06:55, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
> Please don’t change the established meaning of amenity=police; it 
> should keep meaning “a public police station”.
> Most database users are only going to be interested in public police 
> stations, that’s why we’ve gotten by for over 10 years with just 
> amenity=police.
> It’s fine if the police=* tag isn’t I’m used by all renderers and 
> database users at first, because only some types of maps and databases 
> need additional info.
> Joseph
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 3:39 PM Jan S <grimpeur78 at gmail.com 
> <mailto:grimpeur78 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     Am 15. März 2019 00:19:22 MEZ schrieb althio
>     <althio.forum at gmail.com <mailto:althio.forum at gmail.com>>:
>     >Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com
>     <mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     >> > If this seems viable, I would expand the proposal by a migration
>     >proposal from amenity=police to police=station
>     >>
>     >> I don’t think we should abandon amenity=police and it will
>     likely not
>     >happen unless people tag so many different things with the tag
>     that it
>     >becomes useless. My primary interest is in specifying the kind of
>     >police and facility, a generic amenity=police on top of that does not
>     >harm. If the new scheme becomes so widespread that every police
>     station
>     >also has a more specific police=* tag, we can still decide to remove
>     >the amenity=police tags.
>     That sounds reasonable. So we'd keep amenity=police as the general
>     indicator of police facilities and use police=* as a sub-tag to
>     specify the type of facility. The current wiki page for
>     amenity=police would consequently move to police=station and
>     amenity=police would be reduced to indicate that the tag is used
>     for all police facilities (and maybe hold a list of what's
>     considered police by country).
>     I'll adapt the proposal.
>     >There is no need to abandon amenity=police for public facing police
>     >stations.
>     That, on the contrary, doesn't seem consequent to me. We'd end up
>     with amenity=police and police=* as main tags for different types
>     of police facilities. I fear that that would be confusing and
>     cause inconsistent mapping.
>     _______________________________________________
>     Tagging mailing list
>     Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190315/506ee4e8/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list