On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 21:03, Warin <[email protected]> wrote: > On 07/10/19 19:57, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > I added this to the ATG as amenity=community_centre + > community_centre:for=man, > > > 'man' may mean both men and women. On the other hand it maybe the original > use was for males only. I think the value is not good. > There are only 4 uses of the community_centre:for=man in the data base. I > would prefer a different value... with a clear meaning. >
Yes, but in this context I think it's pretty please it's for males not persons. I didn't create that tag, it was already documented at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:community_centre:for. I think we should use Key:community_centre:for rather than Key:gender because per the wiki "The community_centre:for tag is used to describe the group of people that is primarily served by the facility, when it is distinguished by age or gender." https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:community_centre:for > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Australian_Tagging_Guidelines&type=revision&diff=1856025&oldid=1855758. > Not saying we need to follow, this if the discussion leads elsewhere it can > be updated. > > To me it seems more like a community centre for men than a club. > I don't think this warrants it's own tag. > > Since there's a wikipedia page, there's a wikidata tag, I wonder if we > should use operator:wikidata or brand:wikidata to link these all together? > > brand rather than operator? I am not certain where the funding comes from, > some from members contributions. > I'd think each shed has some control over their operations .. so tagging > the operator might give the wrong impression? > Yes I was leaning more towards brand too.
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
