Mar 15, 2019, 7:37 AM by [email protected]:

>
>
> Am 15. März 2019 00:19:22 MEZ schrieb althio <> [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> >:
> >Martin Koppenhoefer <> [email protected] 
> ><mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote:
>
>>> > If this seems viable, I would expand the proposal by a migration
>>>
> >proposal from amenity=police to police=station
>
>>>
>>> I don’t think we should abandon amenity=police and it will likely not
>>>
> >happen unless people tag so many different things with the tag that it
> >becomes useless. My primary interest is in specifying the kind of
> >police and facility, a generic amenity=police on top of that does not
> >harm. If the new scheme becomes so widespread that every police station
> >also has a more specific police=* tag, we can still decide to remove
> >the amenity=police tags.
>
> That sounds reasonable. So we'd keep amenity=police as the general indicator 
> of police facilities
>
Public-facing police facilities. For example police warehouse should not be 
tagged with it
(and even if some are tagged this way I think that everybody would consider it 
as a tagging
mistake).

>  and use police=* as a sub-tag to specify the type of facility.
>
It should be noted that it can be used also without amenity=police for 
non-public
facilities.

>  amenity=police would be reduced to indicate that the tag is used for all 
> police facilities
>
I am against changing meaning of an established tag (even if it has some 
mistaggings).
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Reply via email to