Yes, I would prefer that too... Let's see what others think..
On 19/06/2019 14:18, Warin wrote:
It is a land use, residential .. at least on a temporary basis.
possibly landuse=residential, residential=migrants?
This avoids the over used amenity key. Most renders will render it
unidentified from other residential area and HOT can use their own
rendering to identify it.
On 20/06/19 09:49, Violaine_Do wrote:
I wanted to point out also a few questions or thoughts : i am not
sure it is ok (or pretty sure it is dangerous) to tag houses or group
of houses with refugee=yes because it is quite localised and could be
a sensitive information.
Then I am not a big fan of
amenity=social_facility+social_facility:for=refugee for spotting a
whole camp, as it is recurrent that there is social facilities in
this camp, and so it will lead to errors such as "impossible to have
an amenity inside an amenity".
Looking forward to read HOT views,
Thks
On 12/06/2019 23:29, Rupert Allan wrote:
Hello all,
Thanks Violaine, for sharing this. Yes, we did a lot of work on
these semantics and tagging in the Ugandan context. We use refugee =
yes, because designated refugee areas are not always 'camps'
(settlements, urban blocks, etc).
'Camp' can be pejorative/othering in certain contexts. IDPs as
Internally Displayed Persons are certainly refugees. I copy-in Paul
Uithol and Deo Kiggudde to collaborate in this discussion. Having
limited online access, I will monitor and comment more next week,
once back online proper.
Best,
Rupert
On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, 21:45 Violaine, <viola...@posteo.net
<mailto:viola...@posteo.net>> wrote:
fyi, i think you could help on this discussion...
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: [Tagging] refugee camp
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 10:44:34 -1000
From: Violaine_Do <violaine_...@posteo.de>
<mailto:violaine_...@posteo.de>
Reply-To: violaine_...@posteo.de <mailto:violaine_...@posteo.de>
Organization: OSM
To: Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdre...@gmail.com>
<mailto:dieterdre...@gmail.com>, daveswarth...@gmail.com
<mailto:daveswarth...@gmail.com>, Tag discussion, strategy and
related tools <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
<mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org>
CC: Rupert Allan <rupert.al...@hotosm.org>
<mailto:rupert.al...@hotosm.org>
As wikipedia (1) seems to say refugee camp implies internally
displaced people it seem ok to me. (i was wondering if IDP was a
type of refugees or different)
Maybe add a refugee_camp:for=refugee/idp..., refugee_camp:type=
informal/...
I still want to point out that there is more than 2500 use of
refugee=yes (2) so I add Allan to this discussion, hoping he has
some more field feedbacks, what having this new tag would imply..
1:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugee_camp
2:https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/refugee#overview
On 11/06/2019 21:51, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
I would prefer something like refugee_camp=yes or similar.
Cheers, Martin
--
Violaine_Do
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
--
Violaine_Do
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
