On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 4:41 PM, stevea <[email protected]> wrote: > I muse whether "Federally Funded Research and Development Centers" (FFRDCs) > are amenable to either "landuse=military" or something like it. I'm not > proposing a vote because this may be peculiarly USA-centric. (Then again, > maybe it isn't, as there may very well be similar entities in other > countries). > > Looking at > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federally_Funded_Research_and_Development_Center > we see that for each of these, there is an Administrator (such as RAND > Corporation, MITRE, Associated Universities, Inc. or University of > California) consisting of private corporations, and both private and public > universities, as well a Sponsor, which is a much shorter list consisting > largely of Department of Energy, Department of Defense, Department of > Homeland Security, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NASA (supposed to be > civilian), and National Science Foundation (and that's about it, unless you > get more specific within DoD, like "Department of the Army"). > > Indeed, this wikipedia article quotes a source of "Congressional Research > Service: 'The Quasi Government: Hybrid Organizations with Both Government > and Private Sector Legal Characteristics.'" And so, these hybrid or > quasi-government/military/private sector/(sometimes) public university > entities do more often than not fit the definition of "landuse=military" > which is "for tagging land areas owned/used by the military for whatever > purpose." > > Notwithstanding the Military page in the wiki which states "exercise caution > and know your rights related to mapping military facilities," I do wonder > whether we may want to extend some of the "military=*" tags (airfield, > barracks, bunker, range...) to include these areas. Maybe > "military=research_facility" with this rendering into a concomitant > red-hatched area in mapnik/standard? > > This was initiated by noticing that Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories > (http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=37.6881587505341&lon=-121.704912185669&zoom=15) > is a "hole" with respect to landuse around the rest of the City of > Livermore, California. This particular facility is administered by the > University of California (but clearly is not landuse=university) and > sponsored by the Department of Energy, which as a national, cabinet-level > department, is largely concerned with nuclear weapons and reactors, > radioactive waste and domestic energy. Nuclear fusion (and perhaps weapons) > research are being researched at this particular facility, so at least > "landuse=industrial" is correct. But is some flavor of "military" more > precise, or not?
This facility is being built in my city right now. It isn't in the list you linked to but wouldn't it be a similar situation? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bio_and_Agro-Defense_Facility Right now it is just under construction: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/161231605 But I've wondered what the appropriate tagging for it will be in the future. Toby _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
