[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - ISCED 2011 Education Programme

[stevea]

I amplify here that wherever possible it is both correct and a correct trend for OSM to use natural language / human-readable tags (the values in a key-value pair).  Yes, we do have some tags that remain "numbered" like this (including protect_class), but there is a clear trend away from numerical values towards plain-language values.  Note [1], for example, how protect_class=16 and protect_class=23 were both formally deprecated by hazard=* and boundary=special_economic_zone, respectively.  It takes effort to draft and reach wide agreement with proposals like these, and OSM is on the right track to do so, especially as evidenced by the positive (even overwhelming) support these two Proposals garnered (among others).  But, it's even better if we don't use numerical values in the first place.

OSM still has a ways to go to more fully implement the full elimination of numerical values in tagging, though it does seem that protect_class values of 1, 1a, 1b and 2 through 6 might have more permanence because of their mapping to equivalent IUCN categories.  I'd call that an outlier or an exception, but I also consider the topic to continue to be open for discussion in the interests of improvement (as with virtually everything in OSM).  A handful (or two) of single-digit / very short alpha-numerical values is more manageable, but must be considered carefully before deployment.

Needless to say, the introduction of new tags like isced:* with numerical values not only flies in the face of this positive trend, but exactly as Joseph states here, it simply "will not work well."  The need to look up values in a table is not a long-term workable solution for OSM tagging.  Period / full stop.

[1] https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:protect_class

On Apr 17, 2022, at 12:49 PM, Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> The current proposal will not work well, because it requires mappers to use 2 digit numbers instead of human-readable values. The current isced:level tag also has this problem but at least there are only numbers 1 to 6.
> 
> The proposal says that instead of just tagging with "isced:level=2" we should do things like this: 
> 
> “ A school offering lower secondary vocationaleducation: isced_2011_programme=25
> " A school offering lower secondary vocational education, where graduating will complete ISCED level 2 and give direct access to upper secondary education (ISCED level 3): isced_2011_programme=254”
> 
> university (amenity=university) offering Bachelor's and Master's degree as well as doctorates: isced_2011_programme=64; 74; 84
> or isced_2011_programme=64;74;84
> 
> This is too complex and will not be simple for mappers to use
> 
> If isced:level is going to be changed, it should change to a system that uses human-readable tags in natural language
> 
> - Joseph Eisenberg