[Tagging] Clubhouse vs Community Centre

Volker Schmidt voschix at gmail.com
Thu Apr 1 09:20:07 UTC 2021


What about community centres run by religious organizations?
Here in Italy we have tens of thousands of "patronato", which are to all
effects community centres, but run by the catholic church.
Are they community centres or clubhouses?

On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 11:08, Warin <61sundowner at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 31/3/21 11:59 pm, nathan case wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> A question has arisen out of Fizzie41’s proposed military cadet work [1]
> about how to tag the building in which the cadets would meet as. But it
> holds more widely than that.
>
>
>
> Currently, the recommended tagging scheme [2] for buildings in which a
> club meets is using the amenity=community_centre [3] tag, specifically:
>
>
>
> amenity=community_centre
>
> community_centre=club_home (meetings
>
> community_centre:for=*
>
> If this happens you will be
>
>
>
> This scheme is currently used in 1,421 cases (having started being in use
> from January 2016) [4]. However, this recommendation appears to have been
> via a Wiki edit, rather than an accepted proposal and is not without its
> controversy [5].
>
>
>
> My concern with this approach is that a private building, which is used
> exclusively by one club only, and holds no other “community” events cannot
> possibly be called a community centre. It is, and should be stored as, a
> clubhouse.
>
>
> Agreed.
>
>
>
> A community centre will often (though not always) be owned by a local
> government organisation, e.g. parish council, or national charity body,
> e.g. YMCA. It will host local community events (e.g. town hall sessions),
> be used by multiple clubs, and be available for hire for private functions
> (e.g. birthday celebrations). Of course, some clubs do meet in community
> centres and, in those cases, the building should obviously be tagged as a
> community centre.
>
> Also used by some for yoga, self defense classes, etc. These are usally
> run by an organiser/coach for some profit.
>
>
>
> I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts on this issue and potential
> options going forward.
>
>
>
> Is this situation OK as is, or should we consider amenity=clubhouse or
> building=clubhouse (both already exist) as options for buildings in which a
> single club operates from? Some other tags in use which may be relevant:
>
>
>
> golf=clubhouse [6]
>
> building = clubhouse (619 uses) [7]
>
> building = club_house (196 uses) [8]
>
> amenity = clubhouse (113 uses) [9]
>
> amenity = club_house (126 uses) [10]
>
>
>
>
>
> I think that both community_centres and clubhouse are buildings and should
> be under the one key of building=*.
>
>
> The difference between the two is that one is more adaptable for multiple
> purposes,
>
> while the other is built for and operated by the one club and caters
> primarily for the members of that club.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20210401/53df07cf/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list