[Tagging] Classifying hospitals (Was: Deprecate healthcare=centre)

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Tue Jan 12 12:01:50 UTC 2021


Am Mo., 11. Jan. 2021 um 11:32 Uhr schrieb Frederik Ramm <
frederik at remote.org>:

> But should we strive to make OSM the service where someone comes
> searching for a place to get medical treatment?
>


it could serve for different purposes, for example to analyze the coverage
and distribution, but also to replace what people are now doing in google
maps: get an idea of the options around you.



> I am against modeling free contracts between business entities in OSM.
> Does a certain supermarket participate in a certain rebate scheme? Is a
> certain hotel member of a certain tourist association? Does a certain
> doctor have a contract with a certain health insurance? - All these, in
> my opinion, do not belong in OSM.
>


I agree, for detail at this level, but I would see it differently when it
is about the national health system, regarding literally every citizen of
the country (this depends vastly how health care is organized). I would not
map the individual agreements of health insurances, but if a country has an
important national system, it may be a basic information whether a facility
is recognized or not. For the example the German situation is quite
different from the Italian situation in this regard, from my experience, it
is not a question that seems important in Germany because you can basically
go anywhere you want and will be covered by insurance (but it may depend
where you want to go, I am not sure this is universally valid, surely there
are treatments which are not covered).



>
> If someone is looking for the right medical facility to treat them, they
> should make their decision based on recommendations or on some
> specialist directory for the medical profession, and they can then use
> OSM to find out how to get there (or they can use OSM to first narrow
> down the list to those that are within easy reach).
>


agreed. Just that I believe you could already separate all that provide
basic coverage (public structures and those which are partnering / are
accepting prescriptions) from the rest. If there is not basic coverage, you
do not have to tag this. We are already doing something similar right from
the start for pharmacies btw, dispensing=yes and no.



>
> If every now and then someone goes over the top and tags business
> details onto an object in OSM, let them do it, but let us not go so far
> as to consider such uses when we set up tagging recommendations. OSM is
> not a business (or medical facility, ...) directory.



Yes, as always there is a line behind which the detail is too much, a level
we will not likely be able to manage, keep things up to date, get
sufficient coverage to make sense of it, etc., and there is a more "general
detail level" where we agree it is advisable to add this kind of
information (business names and brands or webpage links, the distinction
between a pub and a restaurant, for example). And there is a grey area in
between, some people say, we do not need phone numbers as we are not a
business directory, others are happy to make use of them.

Cheers,
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210112/bcca3ac8/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list