[Tagging] Removing landuse=military from military=barracks

Bert -Araali- Van Opstal bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com
Wed Apr 14 17:25:38 UTC 2021

I am getting a bit lost here, all the examples mentioned are correctly 
reflected in the proposal and in the current wiki page.

So if I understood the question correctly:
Should it be mandatory for military=barracks to be tagged also with 

military=barracks should designate an area where military personnel live 
and sleep.  Does this implicate that this is by definition land used for 
military purposes.  In my option not (having served in NATO in Germany, 
where many barracks are in the regular residential areas, either single 
or grouped in a more designated suburb, neighbourhood or other.  So the 
landuse may differ, it can be landuse=military as being part of a 
separate military base (yes sometimes called something barracks as is 
described in the wiki), but it can also be landuse=residential, as in 
some cases the land is not owned, even the buildings are not owned by 
the military or used for other miltary purposes like a shooting range or 
training facilities. So one should be usable detached from the other 
one, not reflecting ownership but effective landuse, landuse which is 
clearly distinguishable from other military use has landuse=residential 
(or other values as you like), if part of a larger base with other 
military areas and use, then it will be located in landuse=military.

Sleeping and living doesn't make the landuse different, is similar to 
other groups or communities within the population, but identical to 
landuse=residential, the soldiers reside their.  Same as we have 
students staying in hostels outside an educational campus, rangers 
outside a park etc...

One could discuss if this asks for a boundary like interpretation or 
not, in some cases we do, as we have while village in Africa defined as 
"Special purpose" or "Military" administrative zones. We do map those 
boundaries, but the land and use inside the boundaries is mapped and 
tagged with different landuse and/or military areas, as 
military=barracks.  Military=barracks defines a separate zone, one or 
multiple buildings, the landuse tag should be separate but not mandatory 
and rendered as such independently. We tag independent from rendering, 
the renderers should adopt to the tagging scheme.


Bert Araali

On 14/04/2021 17:43, Peter Neale via Tagging wrote:
> @Brian:  Thank you for adding to my understanding of US English.
> ("two nations divided by a common language"!)
> Regards,
> Peter
> On Wednesday, 14 April 2021, 15:28:55 BST, Brian M. Sperlongano 
> <zelonewolf at gmail.com> wrote:
> It is also common in US English to refer to an army base as 
> "barracks".  So it can refer to either the base or the actual 
> buildings where soldiers sleep.
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021, 10:26 AM Peter Neale via Tagging 
> <tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:tagging at openstreetmap.org>> wrote:
>     Yes, it is very common , in British English, to refer to an "army
>     base" (US English) as a "Barracks".
>     An individual building, used for the accommodation of troops,
>     would be called a "barrack block".
>     An area of land, including one, or more, barrack blocks, a parade
>     square, garages, stores buildings, sports field, etc. would be
>     "the barracks"  e.g Imphal Barracks in York.
>     A single "barracks" - sorry, but it is considered singular, even
>     though it looks like a plural - can house a unit (a company,
>     squadron, workshop, regiment, battalion... don't start asking
>     about all the different terms for essentially the same size of
>     unit), or the headquarters of a larger formation (division,
>     brigade, etc.)
>     So, IMHO in OSM you can map a single building (barrack block) as
>     "military=barracks".  If you map several of these that stand
>     within a common area, that area SHOULD be "landuse=military".  I
>     am a little hesitant about adding the landuse to a single,
>     isolated building, but that would be logical - perhaps include a
>     small strip of land around it, if that is justified?  I DO NOT
>     think that we should stack "landuse=military", one inside another
>     by insisting that every "military=barracks" MUST also have a
>     "landuse=military" tag, even if it stands in an area already
>     tagged as "landuse=military".
>     Regards,
>     Peter
>     (Retired, after 29 years' service in the British Army)
>     On Wednesday, 14 April 2021, 13:27:25 BST, Martin Koppenhoefer
>     <dieterdreist at gmail.com <mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     sent from a phone
>>     On 14 Apr 2021, at 02:24, Graeme Fitzpatrick
>>     <graemefitz1 at gmail.com <mailto:graemefitz1 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>     Since it has been redefined as "buildings where military
>>     personnel live and sleep", it should now only be used on
>>     individual, or a group of, buildings, almost invariably found
>>     inside a base area. With the current mandatory combination with
>>     landuse=military, it means that you have landuse=military +
>>     military=barracks nested inside an area of landuse=military +
>>     military=base, which is a bit awkward.
>     it get’s weirder when the name of the base(?) is then Foo
>     Barracks, e.g. the US Kelley Barracks in Stuttgart:
>     https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelley_Barracks
>     <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelley_Barracks>
>     These are not just "buildings where military personnel live and
>     sleep" but include the headquarters of US Africom.
>     maybe “barracks” is also used for a kind of base in some cases?
>     Not sure about English, but in German usage the term “Kaserne”
>     (barracks), while literally referring to the sleeping quarters, is
>     used as a generic term for a military base “at home” or maybe at
>     “friends”.
>     Cheers Martin
>     _______________________________________________
>     Tagging mailing list
>     Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>     <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Tagging mailing list
>     Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>     <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/20210414/2c6d90d0/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list