Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2019 08:40:09 +0100 From: Topographe Fou To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" Subject: Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along Hi, Personnaly I already use amenity=* for the whole plot/complex when it's clear it is not limited to a building. This apply to schools, hospitals and places of worship (not exhaustive list) in my way of tagging. I believe this is how schools and hospitals are suggested to be mapped and see no exception with places of worships. I don't see a need for religion-based way of tagging (amenity=place_of_worship schema shall be used the same for any religion). So yes I agree with you that places of worship are not always limited to a building (same for a school, an hospital...). Yours, LeTopographeFou I second that. Mark ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
On Mon, 25 Mar 2019 09:38:09 +1100 Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 24/03/19 21:15, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > > sent from a phone > > > >> Am 23.03.2019 um 15:12 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : > >> > >> Mosque complex: tag the whole plot (often the perimeter is also > >> barrier=wall): amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim > >> > >> So, no landuse=religious anymore at all and no building=mosque for > >> the buildings inside a mosque complex (building=yes - or, for the > >> adventurous, multipart buildings with distinct minaret and dome) > > > > +1, I’ve always considered landuse=religious unnecessary, specific > > features will have religion=* > > > So the parking lot associated with a church has a religion? :) Certainly: https://www.google.com/search?q=violators+will+be+baptized=isch -- Mark ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
Hi, Personnaly I already use amenity=* for the whole plot/complex when it's clear it is not limited to a building. This apply to schools, hospitals and places of worship (not exhaustive list) in my way of tagging. I believe this is how schools and hospitals are suggested to be mapped and see no exception with places of worships. I don't see a need for religion-based way of tagging (amenity=place_of_worship schema shall be used the same for any religion). So yes I agree with you that places of worship are not always limited to a building (same for a school, an hospital...). Yours, LeTopographeFou Message original De: j...@liotier.org Envoyé: 23 mars 2019 3:13 PM À: tagging@openstreetmap.org Répondre à: tagging@openstreetmap.org Objet: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along In the Sahelian Openstreetmap I enjoy tagging mosques because they are prominent features, nice for navigation and easy to spot on orbital imagery - for me it has definitely turned into a "gotta catch'em all" game... And I'm not even Muslim ! The tagging scheme I had settled upon was amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim (building=mosque if there is a main building) and landuse=religious + religion=muslim for the plot. I have learned from Muslims and confirmed in literature that this tagging scheme is wrong: what I considered as the mosque itself is merely the main prayer hall. The mosque is actually the whole complex that I used to tag as landuse=religious. So, here is my current position regarding the tagging of mosques: Single building mosque, no change: amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim + building=mosque Mosque complex: tag the whole plot (often the perimeter is also barrier=wall): amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim So, no landuse=religious anymore at all and no building=mosque for the buildings inside a mosque complex (building=yes - or, for the adventurous, multipart buildings with distinct minaret and dome) Anyone else obsessed with mosques to give an opinion on this clarification - is it correct ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
On 25/03/19 10:00, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Am 24.03.2019 um 23:38 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: So the parking lot associated with a church has a religion? :) if you consider the specific parking a “religious landuse” then you will also be able to state which religion it is associated with. When it is associated with a shop, a parking lot will also sell something. If part of a medical practice the parking lot will also be a dentist .. etc ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
sent from a phone > Am 24.03.2019 um 23:38 schrieb Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com>: > > So the parking lot associated with a church has a religion? :) if you consider the specific parking a “religious landuse” then you will also be able to state which religion it is associated with. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
On 24/03/19 21:15, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: sent from a phone Am 23.03.2019 um 15:12 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : Mosque complex: tag the whole plot (often the perimeter is also barrier=wall): amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim So, no landuse=religious anymore at all and no building=mosque for the buildings inside a mosque complex (building=yes - or, for the adventurous, multipart buildings with distinct minaret and dome) +1, I’ve always considered landuse=religious unnecessary, specific features will have religion=* So the parking lot associated with a church has a religion? :) ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
So, If I understand correctly, Mosque are more like a Islamic version Monastery? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
sent from a phone > Am 23.03.2019 um 15:12 schrieb Jean-Marc Liotier : > > Mosque complex: tag the whole plot (often the perimeter is also barrier=wall): > amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim > > So, no landuse=religious anymore at all and no building=mosque for the > buildings inside a mosque complex (building=yes - or, for the adventurous, > multipart buildings with distinct minaret and dome) +1, I’ve always considered landuse=religious unnecessary, specific features will have religion=* Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
I agree that the parking lot is part of the landuse. This is a good arguement for tagging landuse=religious forbtyh whole area, including parking lots, religious classrooms (eg Sunday School, Hebrew School etc), and religious office associated with the place of worship, while using amenity=place_of_worship on the building(s) or land used for prayer, rites, ceremony, assembly, or other forms of worship. Joseph > Parking areas associated with a shop I tag as landuse=retail together with the shop. > See no reason why things associated with a religious feature should not also be similarly tagged - they are for the use of that feature and so should be included as part of the features land use ??? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
On 24/03/19 10:52, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:
I believe that the form and functions of Mosques is variable. The
original poster (Jean-Marc Liotier) said that they are mapping in the
Sahel, the Muslim-majority region along the southern border of the
Sahara desert in Africa. This is a semi-arid, tropical region where
most people are Sunni muslims from the Maliki school, and they share
some cultural similarities. But their practices are different than
those of Shia / Shiite people in Iran, or the Muslim diaspora in
Europe and North America.
I live in Indonesia, where the majority practice Sunni Islam, under
the Shafi'i school of jurisprudence. In the past there was strong Sufi
influence, and there are still a number of pilgrimage sites where
people visit the tombs of Saints or places associated with these
religious heroes.
Since the weather is always warm, most Indonesia mosque buildings are
open on 2 or 3 sides, but the whole area will be inclosed by a fence
or wall that marks the borders of the mosque area, including the areas
for ritual washing and often classrooms for children's religious
education. Mosques are supposed to always be open to the public for
prayer 5 times a day.
A mosque ('masjid", from Arabic) is not just a place of prayer here in
Indonesia. There is a different word (also from Arabic), "musholla" or
"musyola", for a simple prayer room. This can be a small room plus an
area for washing, within a larger secular structure such as an
airport, train station, retail mall, or government office. It can also
be a small separate building in a residential area. I believe a
musholla / musyola is considered a temporary place of prayer, while a
masjid (mosque) is land that is permanently dedicated as an Islamic
place of worship, at least in this school of Islam.
I map the central masjid building as a building=mosque, because
Indonesians refer to the building itself as a mosque, and this is
where the actual worship services and prayers take place, while some
of the other buildings may be offices or classrooms, not specifically
places of prayer or public assembly.
I would not map a musholla as a building=mosque, but I'm not actually
sure what would be the best tagging for these prayer rooms. The
(rather outdated) Indonesian tagging guidelines suggest tagging as an
amenity=place_of_worship for both, which seems imprecise.
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Indonesian_Tagging_Guidelines#Place_of_Worship)
Here's 2 interesting links to discussions about the meaning of
"mosque" vs mushollah:
https://www.albalagh.net/general/0074.shtml
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/170800/when-does-a-place-become-a-mosque
It's hard to decide when to use landuse=religious. If the whole land
area is already tagged as amenity=place_of_worship then database users
already know that the land area is used for religious purposes. But if
only the main building is mapped as amenity=place_of_worship then it
would make sense to map the surrounding land, within the fence or
wall, as landuse=religious.
In the United States, most "Islamic Centres" have all the religious
activities indoors, partially due to cold weather in the winter. In
this case I would definitely tag the main mosque building as the
place_of_worship, rather than the whole land area. Certainly a
suburban mosque, where most of the land is a surface parking lot, does
not need to be tagged amenity=place_of_worship out to the edge of the
parking.
Parking areas associated with a shop I tag as landuse=retail together with the
shop.
See no reason why things associated with a religious feature should not also be
similarly tagged - they are for the use of that feature and so should be
included as part of the features land use ???
On 3/24/19, Paul Allen wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 at 17:41, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
On 23.03.2019 18:19, Paul Allen wrote:
Until you mentioned outside prayer, the obvious solution to a building
complex would
be a multipolygon.
No, there is no MP needed. As there are several distinct objects used for
worshiping, it would even
be wrong.
I disagree with that statement. If they're all part of the same mosque, an
MP is not incorrect.
You'd have to find out if Muslims consider those different buildings to be
components of
the same mosque or not. I doubt that they would, but maybe you're right.
If we follow your thinking, only the pews in a church are for worshipping.
The confessional is for
confessing, and the pulpit is for preaching. Most people would consider
them to be all part of
the same church. Even if, say, the confessionals were in a different
building (I've never heard
of such, but it's a remote possibility). At one time, in some
denominations, the pews were
segregated between rich and poor and/or between men and women. Different
places of
worship or the same? Some universities have buildings in different
locations scattered around
a city: same university or each a different university?
--
Paul
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
I believe that the form and functions of Mosques is variable. The
original poster (Jean-Marc Liotier) said that they are mapping in the
Sahel, the Muslim-majority region along the southern border of the
Sahara desert in Africa. This is a semi-arid, tropical region where
most people are Sunni muslims from the Maliki school, and they share
some cultural similarities. But their practices are different than
those of Shia / Shiite people in Iran, or the Muslim diaspora in
Europe and North America.
I live in Indonesia, where the majority practice Sunni Islam, under
the Shafi'i school of jurisprudence. In the past there was strong Sufi
influence, and there are still a number of pilgrimage sites where
people visit the tombs of Saints or places associated with these
religious heroes.
Since the weather is always warm, most Indonesia mosque buildings are
open on 2 or 3 sides, but the whole area will be inclosed by a fence
or wall that marks the borders of the mosque area, including the areas
for ritual washing and often classrooms for children's religious
education. Mosques are supposed to always be open to the public for
prayer 5 times a day.
A mosque ('masjid", from Arabic) is not just a place of prayer here in
Indonesia. There is a different word (also from Arabic), "musholla" or
"musyola", for a simple prayer room. This can be a small room plus an
area for washing, within a larger secular structure such as an
airport, train station, retail mall, or government office. It can also
be a small separate building in a residential area. I believe a
musholla / musyola is considered a temporary place of prayer, while a
masjid (mosque) is land that is permanently dedicated as an Islamic
place of worship, at least in this school of Islam.
I map the central masjid building as a building=mosque, because
Indonesians refer to the building itself as a mosque, and this is
where the actual worship services and prayers take place, while some
of the other buildings may be offices or classrooms, not specifically
places of prayer or public assembly.
I would not map a musholla as a building=mosque, but I'm not actually
sure what would be the best tagging for these prayer rooms. The
(rather outdated) Indonesian tagging guidelines suggest tagging as an
amenity=place_of_worship for both, which seems imprecise.
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Indonesian_Tagging_Guidelines#Place_of_Worship)
Here's 2 interesting links to discussions about the meaning of
"mosque" vs mushollah:
https://www.albalagh.net/general/0074.shtml
https://islamqa.info/en/answers/170800/when-does-a-place-become-a-mosque
It's hard to decide when to use landuse=religious. If the whole land
area is already tagged as amenity=place_of_worship then database users
already know that the land area is used for religious purposes. But if
only the main building is mapped as amenity=place_of_worship then it
would make sense to map the surrounding land, within the fence or
wall, as landuse=religious.
In the United States, most "Islamic Centres" have all the religious
activities indoors, partially due to cold weather in the winter. In
this case I would definitely tag the main mosque building as the
place_of_worship, rather than the whole land area. Certainly a
suburban mosque, where most of the land is a surface parking lot, does
not need to be tagged amenity=place_of_worship out to the edge of the
parking.
On 3/24/19, Paul Allen wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 at 17:41, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
>
>> On 23.03.2019 18:19, Paul Allen wrote:
>> >
>> > Until you mentioned outside prayer, the obvious solution to a building
>> complex would
>> > be a multipolygon.
>>
>> No, there is no MP needed. As there are several distinct objects used for
>> worshiping, it would even
>> be wrong.
>>
>
> I disagree with that statement. If they're all part of the same mosque, an
> MP is not incorrect.
>
> You'd have to find out if Muslims consider those different buildings to be
> components of
> the same mosque or not. I doubt that they would, but maybe you're right.
>
> If we follow your thinking, only the pews in a church are for worshipping.
> The confessional is for
> confessing, and the pulpit is for preaching. Most people would consider
> them to be all part of
> the same church. Even if, say, the confessionals were in a different
> building (I've never heard
> of such, but it's a remote possibility). At one time, in some
> denominations, the pews were
> segregated between rich and poor and/or between men and women. Different
> places of
> worship or the same? Some universities have buildings in different
> locations scattered around
> a city: same university or each a different university?
>
> --
> Paul
>
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 at 17:41, Tom Pfeifer wrote: > On 23.03.2019 18:19, Paul Allen wrote: > > > > Until you mentioned outside prayer, the obvious solution to a building > complex would > > be a multipolygon. > > No, there is no MP needed. As there are several distinct objects used for > worshiping, it would even > be wrong. > I disagree with that statement. If they're all part of the same mosque, an MP is not incorrect. You'd have to find out if Muslims consider those different buildings to be components of the same mosque or not. I doubt that they would, but maybe you're right. If we follow your thinking, only the pews in a church are for worshipping. The confessional is for confessing, and the pulpit is for preaching. Most people would consider them to be all part of the same church. Even if, say, the confessionals were in a different building (I've never heard of such, but it's a remote possibility). At one time, in some denominations, the pews were segregated between rich and poor and/or between men and women. Different places of worship or the same? Some universities have buildings in different locations scattered around a city: same university or each a different university? -- Paul ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
On 23.03.2019 18:19, Paul Allen wrote: On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 at 17:05, Jean-Marc Liotier mailto:j...@liotier.org>> wrote: The case I have in mind is where the mosque is a complex of several buildings - such as the building for ritual ablutions, a separate prayer building for women, the outside prayer ground for days of large gatherings, the toilets etc. Until you mentioned outside prayer, the obvious solution to a building complex would be a multipolygon. No, there is no MP needed. As there are several distinct objects used for worshiping, it would even be wrong. Thus you can tag the campus complex with landuse=religious, and the individual worshiping places with amenity=place_of_worship. You could even add description=* to explain their individual purpose, and building=* if it is a building. tom ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
Jean-Marc Liotier writes: > On 3/23/19 6:04 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: >> I find the implicit rules really problematic, as we don't have a >> machine-readable repository of them that can be used to processs tags as >> they are to the full logical set of what they mean. > > So, should the amenity=place_of_worship complex have landuse=religious > too ? I wouldn't mind - if a consensus here believes so. My view is perhaps a bit extreme, which is that ideally everything that has human use would have some landuse tag. I prefer explicit representation of landuse and landcover both, with a clear logical separation between these two concepts. So in a situation where there is a church building and parking lot (carpark in en_GB) on a parcel (area of land under one ownership), I would put landuse=religious. Same for something larger with more buildings. And if there were two unrelated churches on two adjacent lots, I would ideally put only one landuse=religious object (which might get into relations), since landuse is not about per parcel or per object, but about groups of them. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 at 17:05, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: > > The case I have in mind is where the mosque is a complex of several > buildings - such as the building for ritual ablutions, a separate prayer > building for women, the outside prayer ground for days of large > gatherings, the toilets etc. Until you mentioned outside prayer, the obvious solution to a building complex would be a multipolygon. -- Paul ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
On 3/23/19 6:04 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: I find the implicit rules really problematic, as we don't have a machine-readable repository of them that can be used to processs tags as they are to the full logical set of what they mean. So, should the amenity=place_of_worship complex have landuse=religious too ? I wouldn't mind - if a consensus here believes so. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 at 14:13, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: > And I'm not even Muslim ! > That makes two of us. I'm an infidel. An omni-infidel. It doesn't matter what faith somebody is, I am not of that faith. I have learned from Muslims and confirmed in literature that this > tagging scheme is wrong: what I considered as the mosque itself is > merely the main prayer hall. The mosque is actually the whole complex > that I used to tag as landuse=religious. > Going by what Wikipedia says on the subject (which may be completely wrong) a mosque is defined by Muslims using it as a place of prayer. It could be a building, or an area of open land. It could be an impromptu decision to pray there. Mosque = place of prayer. That said, it appears your own researches imply that Mosque doesn't mean "Islamic equivalent of a church" but "Islamic equivalent of a churchyard." I'm not convinced, given the Wikipedia article, that your interpretation is correct. It might be, if prayer happens in the grounds as well as the building or instead of the building, but that may not usually be the case. So, no landuse=religious anymore If the land is associated with the building and is subject to some form of religious restrictions as to what may be done there (it's not public land where you could have a picnic and drink a few beers) then it's landuse=religious. Even if, as with Christian churchyards, all its used for is to grow grass. > at all and no building=mosque for the > buildings inside a mosque complex (building=yes - or, for the > adventurous, multipart buildings with distinct minaret and dome) > Others will no doubt disagree, but I use building=* to describe what it looks like. It's building=church if it looks like a church even if it's long since been deconsecrated and turned into dwellings or a bingo hall. It's building=chapel if it looks like a chapel. And it's building=mosque if it looks like what most non-Islamic people would call a mosque (i.e., dome and minarets). As in "What's that over there that looks like a church?" Or "Go straight on for a mile and turn left at the church." It may no longer be used as a church, but when using it as a landmark, particularly if seen at a distance, you go by the appearance. Other tags are used to describe the function. I'd continue to tag the building as a mosque. Because most of the time if there's a building on religious ground that looks like a mosque then people are going to be praying inside the building and not outside on the grass. I'd continue to use landuse=religious for the grounds, even if (as with many Christian churchyards) they're indistinguishable from a private garden because there will be access and usage restrictions, even if they're informal: you will be expected to comport yourself accordingly. -- Paul ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
Jean-Marc Liotier writes: > On 3/23/19 5:28 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: >> Jean-Marc Liotier writes: >>> So, no landuse=religious anymore at all and no building=mosque for the >> I don't understand why you think landuse=religious shouldn't be >> present. It seems that all land used for religious purposes should >> have that tag > > Redundancy ? I have the same issue for shop=* (or even amenity=fuel) > also tagged with landuse=retail - same sort of redundancy. > > To me, amenity=place of worship is implicitly landuse=religious and > shop=* is implicitly landuse=retail... Am I alone in thinking that way? You are surely not alone :-) I see having landuse as consistency, so that data consumers understanding landuse can do so, without having a vast array of implicit rules. As for shop/fuel, I prefer shop etc. tags on the individual places, and landuse=retail on the entire land area that is in use for that sort of thing (including parking - the whole group of parcels). That extent of area cannot be inferred from the other tags. I find the implicit rules really problematic, as we don't have a machine-readable repository of them that can be used to processs tags as they are to the full logical set of what they mean. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
On 3/23/19 4:55 PM, Tom Pfeifer wrote: On 23.03.2019 15:12, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: The wikipedia article has some insight in the process, however it also mentions that a mosque can be a building. So, if the mosque is a building, tagging building=mosque would be fine. Yes, the case of a single building containing an integrated mosque is "amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim + building=mosque". The case I have in mind is where the mosque is a complex of several buildings - such as the building for ritual ablutions, a separate prayer building for women, the outside prayer ground for days of large gatherings, the toilets etc. The main prayer hall, with the dome roof and the minaret tower is what comes to mind when we think "mosque" but the mosque is actually the whole walled complex - hence tagging it "amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim". ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
On 3/23/19 5:28 PM, Greg Troxel wrote: Jean-Marc Liotier writes: So, no landuse=religious anymore at all and no building=mosque for the I don't understand why you think landuse=religious shouldn't be present. It seems that all land used for religious purposes should have that tag Redundancy ? I have the same issue for shop=* (or even amenity=fuel) also tagged with landuse=retail - same sort of redundancy. To me, amenity=place of worship is implicitly landuse=religious and shop=* is implicitly landuse=retail... Am I alone in thinking that way ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
Jean-Marc Liotier writes: > So, no landuse=religious anymore at all and no building=mosque for the I don't understand why you think landuse=religious shouldn't be present.It seems that all land used for religious purposes should have that tag, whether it's a smallish lot that just contains a building, or whether it's a larger campus, and regardless of which religion. I do not understand the concept of separate rules per religion about landuse tags. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
On 23.03.2019 15:12, Jean-Marc Liotier wrote: I have learned from Muslims and confirmed in literature that this tagging scheme is wrong: what I considered as the mosque itself is merely the main prayer hall. The mosque is actually the whole complex that I used to tag as landuse=religious. So, if the actual praying happens in the building, this is the place where the worshiping happens, hence the place of worship, hence amenity=place_of_worship Thus I see no need for different tagging. The wikipedia article has some insight in the process, however it also mentions that a mosque can be a building. So, if the mosque is a building, tagging building=mosque would be fine. Even for the situation that the worshiping happens without a building, the general campus can be tagged landuse=religious, the more specific location of the worshiping amenity=place_of_worship, but without a building tag. tom ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] I have been tagging mosques wrong all along
In the Sahelian Openstreetmap I enjoy tagging mosques because they are prominent features, nice for navigation and easy to spot on orbital imagery - for me it has definitely turned into a "gotta catch'em all" game... And I'm not even Muslim ! The tagging scheme I had settled upon was amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim (building=mosque if there is a main building) and landuse=religious + religion=muslim for the plot. I have learned from Muslims and confirmed in literature that this tagging scheme is wrong: what I considered as the mosque itself is merely the main prayer hall. The mosque is actually the whole complex that I used to tag as landuse=religious. So, here is my current position regarding the tagging of mosques: Single building mosque, no change: amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim + building=mosque Mosque complex: tag the whole plot (often the perimeter is also barrier=wall): amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim So, no landuse=religious anymore at all and no building=mosque for the buildings inside a mosque complex (building=yes - or, for the adventurous, multipart buildings with distinct minaret and dome) Anyone else obsessed with mosques to give an opinion on this clarification - is it correct ? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
