A couple of areas where I think we could improve on our tagging to help data users:
* I think it would be useful if we had a machine-readable way to tag an amenity=school area that is actually a site shared between two or more individual schools. In this case, while the area will probably be tagged amenity=school, it doesn't actually correspond to an individual school, and data uses should expect additional amenity=school objects for the individual schools within it. Maybe something like school=shared_site. My tools could then ignore such objects for the purposes of matching to official data. * I think it would be useful if we had a machine-readable way to tag a school site that isn't the main site for that particular school. This would let data-users know that the school object isn't a separate school, but is part of another school that they should expect to find another amenity=school object for. This would also help my tools as they could then check that there is only one main site for each official school and flag up errors where this is not the case. Any matching distance errors could also be downgraded on non-main sites. I'm not sure how best to tag this though. main_site=no, additional_site=yes, ... ? Best wishes, Robert. -- Robert Whittaker _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
