[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Refugee Site Location
António Madeira
antoniomadeira at gmx.com
Fri Apr 17 21:54:39 UTC 2020
If a refugee site has a well established name (and, unfortunately, there
are many examples all over the world), I don't see why it can't have a
"place" tag.
Às 18:24 de 17/04/2020, Lukas-458 at web.de escreveu:
> Hi,
> my question is whether this then rather would be something for the
> "place" tag? Or did we maybe have that discussion already?
> --Lukas
> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 17. April 2020 um 18:28 Uhr
> *Von:* "Manon Viou" <m_viou at cartong.org>
> *An:* "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
> <tagging at openstreetmap.org>
> *Betreff:* Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Refugee Site Location
> Hello everyone,
> It seems I haven't been very clear in my explanations; I sometimes
> have a bit of trouble choosing the right word (especially in English).
> And I think the “small”/”large” discussion is going the wrong direction…
> The new tag we want to propose is to map refugee camps or as it’s
> seems better to say in English now : refugee sites. So we want to map
> *human settlement*.
> The social_facility=shelter tag is very suitable to map single or
> individual building or a small group of buildings like a refugee
> center, an accommodation center or a care and hosting center for refugees.
> But (according to many people now) the social_facility=shelter tag is
> not suitable to map refugee camps that are human settlements,
> populated places where hundreds or thousands people live.
> That’s why we propose to create a new value for the amenity tag :
> amenity=refugee_site, to map human settlement where refugees can find
> protection.
> kind regards,
> Manon
>
> Le 17 avril 2020 à 13:03, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> a écrit :
> On 17/4/20 5:29 am, Manon Viou wrote:
>
> 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.
>
> ?? How is it 'obvious'???
>
> I have no idea of what that 'obvious' thing is!
>
> Is it really necessary to set a precise rule ?
>
> At the moment there is nothing that can be used to distinguish
> between the two.
>
> Suggestion have been made on the number of buildings, number of
> people and the area.
>
> Please tell us how you distinguish between them.
>
> 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.
>
> Examples are fine. But there must be a statement in words of the
> difference between them.
>
> Regards,
> Manon
>
> Le 16 avril 2020 à 02:16, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com>
> <mailto: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 <mailto: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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20200417/768e75b8/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Tagging
mailing list