[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - police=*

[Warin]

On 17/03/19 03:15, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
>
>
>
> sent from a phone
> On 16. Mar 2019, at 15:53, Jan S <grimpeur78 at gmail.com 
> <mailto:grimpeur78 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> So you basically can't rely on OSM to find a police station in case 
>> of an emergency.
>
>
> let us not overemphasize the emergency in this context. In an urgent 
> emergency you would expect the police to come to you rather than the 
> opposite.

If you are being assaulted, it is better to run towards the police 
rather than away.

>
> I agree that we should have an amenity tag for police stations (this 
> still means many of them would be closed after office times, for 
> example in Germany), and that amenity=police was defined so since the 
> beginning.
> And it appears that other police facilities and non public operations 
> also bear the tag.
>
> We could try to migrate those other police amenities to 
> amenity=police_facility
>
> some would better be retagged as office, but if you want a tag which 
> more reliably states “police station”, it looks like a new subtag e.g. 
> police=station could work.

Why have amenity=police_facility where that too will have to have sub 
tags .. possibly more police=* values?

Why not simply accept the key police=* and be done with the intermediate 
step of amenity=police or amenity=police_facility or 
amenity=police_office ro amenity=police_garage etc... ?
>
> There are already 22 of them ;-)
> https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/police#values

Any if the key police=* how many will then become used?

> Most common (the only significantly used) value for “police” is 
> “traffic_police” (987 uses). This is a type of police, not a type of 
> facility.

A 'type' of police in some police facility.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190317/a61cee6a/attachment.html>