[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

Jan S grimpeur78 at gmail.com
Fri Mar 15 16:16:17 UTC 2019

Am 15. März 2019 09:17:31 MEZ schrieb Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at tutanota.com>:
>Mar 15, 2019, 7:37 AM by grimpeur78 at gmail.com:
>> 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:
>>>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
>Public-facing police facilities. For example police warehouse should
>not be tagged with it
>(and even if some are tagged this way I think that everybody would
>consider it as a tagging

I sense dissent here about the future use of amenity=police. Would it be a possible solution to keep amenity=police for public-facing police stations only, but invite mappers on the wiki to nevertheless add police=station, so that in the future the majority of police stations will hopefully also carry the police=station tag?

More information about the Tagging mailing list