On 6/27/2016 7:56 PM, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote on 2016/06/27 11:20:
Recently we have discovered (in a thread on the Italian ML), that
someone has deprecated amenity=nursing_home by putting a disclaimer
on the wikipage [1] to use
amenity=social_facility
social_facility=group_home
[...]
What do you say, shouldn't we remove this disclaimer from the nursing
home page and shall we continue to encourage the use of the tag
amenity=nursing_home where it applies to?
No. amenity=social_facility is a success story of structured tagging, and
nursing_home -> social_facility shows in Mathias Dahl excellent tag
migration
analysis [1] as the tag with the highest transition count, thus excellent
acceptance among mappers.
A nursing home is indeed a social facility, and with the sub-tags of
social_facility=* and social_facility:for=* you can specify quite
precisely what type it is and who it is provided for.
I agree that subsuming permanent care under the type
social_facility=group_home
is not ideal, and it might be possible to develop a better match,
such as social_facility=permanent_care (contrasting the
=ambulatory_care) or similar
for this type, even social_facility=nursing_home could be possible.
[1]
http://matiasdahl.iki.fi/2015/finding-related-amenity-tags-on-the-openstreetmap
The first wiki page for social_facility=group_home back in May 2011 says
"amenity=nursing_home not to be used" .. and list the status as approved
.. so it should have been talked about somewhere. ~21,000 occurrences in
the data base.
The wiki page for amenity=nursing_home has the status of 'inuse' ..
~11,000 occurrences in the data base.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
