[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC -Funeral hall

Joseph Eisenberg joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Wed Aug 19 15:56:56 UTC 2020

In the US, there are privately owned cemeteries, often with a private
funeral home / mortuary building on the site. You can buy a plot and also
pay for the funeral services, including the use of a hall for a viewing,
reception or funeral service (religious or otherwise).

- a funeral home and private cemetery.

In many American cities most of the cemeteries, crematoriums and mausoleums
are privately owned and operated.

So my question is if we should add this new tag to the reception / service
halls which are found at at private funeral homes / mortuaries as well?
Often these are in the same building as the crematorium and the morgue
(where bodies are prepared and stored prior to burial or cremation), and
the offices and reception for the funeral home are also there.

Or are we only thinking to use this new tag for stand-alone halls?

It would also be good to clarify how these are different than a
place_of_worship. For example, consider the many non-sectarian chapels and
prayer rooms found in airports, shopping centres, hospitals, and similar
public facilities. Aren't those tagged as amenity=place_of_worship - or is
that also a mistake?

- Joseph Eisenberg

On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 7:13 AM <wolle68 at posteo.de> wrote:

> Not important at all. I just think that if it is ancillary to the
> business of selling coffins, transporting corpses, preparing them for
> burial, doing paperwork in relation to that etc. (what the French call a
> "funérarium"), then it doesn't deserve a tag distinct from the funeral
> directors tag (but if a majority think otherwise, I don't have strong
> feelings about it either).
> Am 19.08.2020 15:47 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:
> > sent from a phone
> >
> >>> On 19. Aug 2020, at 15:33, wolle68 at posteo.de wrote:
> >> I could imagine rare cases of a privately run cemetery not linked to
> >> any religion or belief/life stance and where there is such a building.
> >> But typically, they would be public.
> >
> >
> > let me rephrase my question: how important is it that the facility is
> > “public”?
> > IMHO this feature should have a functional definition only, everything
> > else depends on the context and is not really relevant.
> >
> > Cheers Martin
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20200819/c6dc0104/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list