[Tagging] RFC: school:for (to map special education and other ambiguous cases)

[Pieter Vander Vennet]

Hi all,

Thanks for the interesting and nuanced discussion that has come up.

I'm gonna try address multiple issues in this mail:


      Inclusive schools

If a school is legally required to accept students with some disability 
or extra care need, this does not change anything to the fact that this 
is an *ad hoc* policy for this student. If it is called /Individual/ 
Education/service plan, the ad-hoc nature is hidden in plain sight.

 From another perspective, having a school legally require to accept 
these students makes the school still mainstream, which would again 
indicate that /no/ special tag is needed.

Note that I did add a paragraph to make this explicit, but this was 
already stated within the actual proposal.


      Normal_abled vs mainstream

The proposal to switch from "normal_abled" to mainstream sounds pretty 
good - so I switched in in the draft. I also ade explicit that this is a 
tag that should /only/ be used if e.g. both normal_abled students and 
special-ed students are both taught at the same school (or if one could 
doubt this).

Whether or not these special students and normal-abled students are 
taught in a mixed manner out of scope for this tag. It could be a nice 
follow-up tagging scheme.


      Eduction:*

Oh, F***. The "education:*" looks like yet another undocumented can of 
worms...

I am however considering to move this proposal from *school:for* to 
*education:for* as this will also enable this tagging on other 
educational features such as kindergartens, universities, colleges, ...

Furthermore, *education:**facilities_for* might /also/ be good, but then 
we lose the ability to indicate that normal-abled students are taught on 
a school to. (There are some schools where  you /need to have/ a 
diagnosis of something to be able to enter)


      Other tags and previous usage

I've noted int the wiki tags such as `access:deaf` and `access:blind` 
should be retagged. There are about 60 entries of both, mostly on the 
same objects.
In a similar vein, we'll probably have to retag various other tags with 
the same intent to this value; but as this is very spread out, it is 
hard to determine which ones this are.


      Normal people might never use this data!?

Yeah, so what? There are many other use cases, e.g. statistics or 
governmental uses. The fact that I have been spending the last two weeks 
nearly full time on this subject, paid by my employer to do this 
illustrates that there is a need for this data (or at least school 
data).  OpenStreetMap is used for way more then only creating maps ;)

Furhtermore, as main dev of MapComplete, I have experienced more then 
once that making this data easy to access and easy to update is key to 
having the data updated and used. This is not the first time OSM has 
gotten into a very niche topic. Rather, I'd say that OSM's /strength/ is 
that it /bundles/ and /integrates/ all this niche mapping!

Kind regards,
Pieter

On 19.06.22 09:24, stevea wrote:
> On Jun 19, 2022, at 12:10 AM, Minh Nguyen<minh at nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us>  wrote:
>> What can I say, my crystal ball is imperfect. :-)
> We do our best here, indeed!
>
>> It's not that I want it to be impossible to use OSM in a certain manner. But if a realistic use case cannot be articulated for tagging something as difficult to ascertain as IEP/ISP acceptance, then how do we know we're designing the right tagging scheme upfront? Better to let such tagging evolve organically and revisit it later than to design a potentially flawed scheme now, get it approved, and be stuck trying to explain it.
> Yes, there is letting tagging evolve (throwing at the dartboard), then there is "perfection is the enemy of the good," so you never throw the dart, fearing to never hit the bullseye, let alone hitting even the dartboard at all.  Somewhere in the middle is a sweet spot, and it's not always east to "foresee!"
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20220620/697778eb/attachment.htm>