[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Refugee Site Location

António Madeira antoniomadeira at gmx.com
Thu Apr 16 21:32:12 UTC 2020


Maybe I missed something on this long thread but I don't understand why
we need to divide large refugee site from small refugee site. Why create
ambiguities if all of them are refugee sites?
Do we divide big schools from small schools? Or small theatres from big
theatres?
Why don't we just create the amenity=refugee_site tag and populate it
with basic keys like name, operator, population, etc. and then map
whatever exists inside that area, be it buildings, social facilities,
etc. There are refugee_sites which are de facto towns and villages, so
those would be mapped as a normal place.

Às 16:29 de 16/04/2020, Manon Viou escreveu:
> Hello,
> According to Martin and Warin, the difference between large and small
> refugee site is not clear enough,
> Martin suggested to use population capacity, for instance less than
> 200 people fro small refugee site,
> Warin suggested to use number of square meters,
> For what I have observed, small facilities sheltering refugee (for
> instance: refugee centers, accommodation center, care and hosting
> center, church) are not exactly what we can call refugee site. the
> difference, beyond the number of building, number of population or
> square meter, is quite obvious. Is it really necessary to set a
> precise rule ? I would rather suggest to share some example (like the
> ones mentioned above) in order to help contributors to decide if it
> rather an amenity=refugee_site or a social_facility=shelter.
> Regards,
> Manon
>> Le 16 avril 2020 à 02:16, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>> On 16/4/20 1:23 am, Manon Viou wrote:
>>> Thanks Martin, yes, refugee sites should always be temporary even
>>> if, as you said, some turn to be very long term places. That's why
>>> we do not suggest to add temporary/permanent options.
>>> Manon
>>
>>
>> In which case the description for amenity=social_facility +
>> social_facility=shelter is not correct.
>>
>>
>> If it is to be done on area then specify the number of square meters
>> rather than the number of buildings???
>>
>> Buildings can be a of different sizes and capacities. An area could
>> be more consistent as to the number of people.
>>
>> Imagery may not be up to date so counting buildings may not be possible.
>>
>>
>>>> Le 15 avril 2020 à 11:36, Martin Koppenhoefer <
>>>> dieterdreist at gmail.com <mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com>> a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> sent from a phone
>>>>
>>>>> On 15. Apr 2020, at 01:13, Warin < 61sundowner at gmail.com
>>>>> <mailto:61sundowner at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I would think amenity=refugee_site is an area set aside for the
>>>>> non-temporary residential use of refugees
>>>>
>>>> maybe I’m a dreamer, but I would expect all refugee related
>>>> features to be “temporary”, even if we are talking about relatively
>>>> long periods of time
>>>>
>>>> Cheers Martin
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
> CartONG- Humanitarian mapping and information management
> <http://www.cartong.org>
>
> Manon Viou
>
> *Coordinatrice projet Missing Maps*
>
> Email: m_viou at cartong.org <mailto:m_viou at cartong.org> | Skype: manon.viou
> Phone: +33 (0)4 79 26 28 82 | Mobile: +33 (0)7 83889839
>
> Address: Chambéry, France - Lon: 05°55'24''N | Lat: 45°30'20''E
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200416/ad6b6790/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list