On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:57:36 +0200
Tom Pfeifer wrote:
> On 23.04.2018 12:12, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> > For privacy concerns we obviously wouldn't map foster families, I'm
> > less sure for supervised shared apartments (it depends whether they
> > are publicly known / promoted / listed, have
On 23.04.2018 12:12, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
For privacy concerns we obviously wouldn't map foster families, I'm less sure for supervised shared
apartments (it depends whether they are publicly known / promoted / listed, have a sign, etc., or if
you need "insider knowledge").
Exactly. I wou
2018-04-23 0:30 GMT+02:00 Tom Pfeifer :
>
> As for the part of the world I live in, Charles Dickens-style 'orphanages'
> don't exist anymore.
> Younger minors that are separated from their parents would be placed in
> foster families, or live in family-style structures following the
> SOS-Kinderdo
On 22.04.2018 23:12, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
On 22. Apr 2018, at 22:23, Paul Allen wrote:
It might have as much to do with tagging as trying to replace terms with
euphemisms. They're all social facilities.
They're all group homes. Then specify the target group.
I am getting more and mor
sent from a phone
> On 22. Apr 2018, at 22:23, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> It might have as much to do with tagging as trying to replace terms with
> euphemisms. They're all social facilities.
> They're all group homes. Then specify the target group.
>
> Handling it any other way would lead to a
On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 8:57 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
>
> I see, but there are also actual group homes, like those described in the
> wikipedia article. I guess there will also generally have been some changes
> in the way orphanages or nursing homes are organized, if you look at long
> t
sent from a phone
> On 22. Apr 2018, at 20:56, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> As I understand it, "group home" is a euphemism (or umbrella term, depending
> how you view such linguistic
> changes) replacing things like "orphanage," "old folks' home," "nursing
> home" and the like.
I see, but there
On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 7:23 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> > On 22. Apr 2018, at 18:07, Paul Allen wrote:
> >
> > The distinction is between living as an individual and living in
> combination with others and sharing some facilities
>
>
> I have never heard of facilities for orphans where t
sent from a phone
> On 22. Apr 2018, at 18:07, Paul Allen wrote:
>
> The distinction is between living as an individual and living in combination
> with others and sharing some facilities
I have never heard of facilities for orphans where they live individually and
don’t share facilities,
On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 4:54 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>
> I would say the question is less about the size of the house and more
> about the size of the group(s). To me the term “group” in the context of
> living implies a small number of people in one “unit”. You are not living
> with a “gr
sent from a phone
> On 22. Apr 2018, at 11:16, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
> 1) The note was already there, but it was worded in a confusing way
> (it was stated in an indirect way with "The OSM use does not limit the
> size of such home").
I would say the question is less about the size of t
On Sun, 22 Apr 2018 10:33:31 +0200
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> it never works when we use words as tags with a different meaning
> than the established one. I oppose adding such a note.
1) The note was already there, but it was worded in a confusing way
(it was stated in an indirect way with "T
sent from a phone
> On 22. Apr 2018, at 09:15, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
>
> I will add note that OSM usage of group home is different from how
> Wikipedia and others may define it
it never works when we use words as tags with a different meaning than the
established one. I oppose adding suc
On Fri, 20 Apr 2018 19:01:55 +0200
Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:28:09 +0200
> Tom Pfeifer wrote:
>
> > On 20.04.2018 12:00, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> > > I encountered one with amenity=social_facility, JOSM is asking to
> > > provide proper social_facility tag (what make
On Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:28:09 +0200
Tom Pfeifer wrote:
> On 20.04.2018 12:00, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> > I encountered one with amenity=social_facility, JOSM is asking to
> > provide proper social_facility tag (what makes sense)
> >
> > None from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:social_f
On 20.04.2018 12:00, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
I encountered one with amenity=social_facility, JOSM is asking to
provide proper social_facility tag (what makes sense)
None from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:social_facility seems
to fit so I used social_facility=orphanage
used 17x
Is
I encountered one with amenity=social_facility, JOSM is asking to
provide proper social_facility tag (what makes sense)
None from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:social_facility seems
to fit so I used social_facility=orphanage
Is there any good reason to use other tag?
__
17 matches
Mail list logo
