[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.
TonyS
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