[Tagging] Too many different features lumped together under amenity=social_facility?

[Greg Troxel]

Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> writes:

> apart from workshops, it is this overly broad meaning of "social facility"
> that doesn't make the tag super useful. In the end you will have to add

I agree with this overbroad notion.  I am very much in favor of a
top-level tag with subtags when all of the subthings are clearly part of
some larger concept.  But social_facility seems to be not like that.

I said this in an earlier thread, but "group home" is a loaded word and
it would be good to avoid using it in a way that applies incorrect
connotations.  Specifically, in the US it is not used for a place where
people live because they are unable to care for themselves fully because
of normal aspects of aging (physical inability and dementia).

Also, there are places "independent living", and I think calling those
"social facility" is wrong.   Overall, I'd be in favor of completely
removing the use of social facility in tagging, as it carries too much
baggage and historical confusion compared to its value.