Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
30 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

SelfishSeahorse
Hello everyone!

I am proposing a new tag, landuse=governmental, for marking land that
is used for governing:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dgovernmental

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

Joseph Eisenberg

Thanks for working on this proposal, Markus. I agree that it would be useful to have an approved type of land use for the administrative offices of governments. 


However, I'm not sure that "governmental" is the best value for the landuse key. I think there would be a risk of mappers finding this tag in the editors and using it for all governnment-owned land, not just for administrative offices. In North America, and in many developing countries, the national or local government owns large areas of land, including rangeland, forests, transportation facilities, and military areas, in addition to land uses for government offices.


In North America, it is somewhat common to talk about "government land" or more specifically, "Federal land," "State land", and "Municipal land". But the only uses of "governmental land use" I've found are in phrases talking about "governmental land use policy", "governmental land use regulations", and "governmental land use decision making". In these cases, the phrase is talking about governments regulating all types of land use, including commercial, retail, residential and industrial.


For these reasons, I believe the current tag "landuse=civic_admin" or "landuse=public_administration" are a little better. They are not perfect, because "civic" isn't precisely correct for land used for national or provincial government offices, but they are less ambiguous. If this proposal is going to use a new tag, it should include something about the administrative nature of the land, so that mappers are less likely to use the tag incorrectly for other types of government-owned land.


Also, in the proposal, it is stated that this tag will not be used for "Public service facilities"

What is the definition of a "public service facility" as opposed to "public administration offices?"

For example, would the Department of Motor Vehicles be considered a public service, or an administrative office?

What about the administrative headquarters of the Public Health Department?

These offices combine some administrative features and some public service features.


Thanks! I hope this proposal will be approved once it is improved - Joseph



On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 7:26 AM SelfishSeahorse <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello everyone!

I am proposing a new tag, landuse=governmental, for marking land that
is used for governing:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dgovernmental

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

Warin
I think that there first need to be clear definitions of what are:

  • public administration
  • executive
  • Legislature
  • Judiciary (courts)

and where things fit...

police (national, state, municipal)

military - excluded?

libraries (national, state, municipal)

schools - excluded?

tax office

vehicle licence office

post office - excluded?


and so on...

Do these all need to be combined? That does suit places where they are physically combined ... and if people then want to further identify them then sub tags could be used.

As for the word to use... that will come, after the definitions?

On 14/10/18 13:00, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

Thanks for working on this proposal, Markus. I agree that it would be useful to have an approved type of land use for the administrative offices of governments. 


However, I'm not sure that "governmental" is the best value for the landuse key. I think there would be a risk of mappers finding this tag in the editors and using it for all governnment-owned land, not just for administrative offices. In North America, and in many developing countries, the national or local government owns large areas of land, including rangeland, forests, transportation facilities, and military areas, in addition to land uses for government offices.


In North America, it is somewhat common to talk about "government land" or more specifically, "Federal land," "State land", and "Municipal land". But the only uses of "governmental land use" I've found are in phrases talking about "governmental land use policy", "governmental land use regulations", and "governmental land use decision making". In these cases, the phrase is talking about governments regulating all types of land use, including commercial, retail, residential and industrial.


For these reasons, I believe the current tag "landuse=civic_admin" or "landuse=public_administration" are a little better. They are not perfect, because "civic" isn't precisely correct for land used for national or provincial government offices, but they are less ambiguous. If this proposal is going to use a new tag, it should include something about the administrative nature of the land, so that mappers are less likely to use the tag incorrectly for other types of government-owned land.


Also, in the proposal, it is stated that this tag will not be used for "Public service facilities"

What is the definition of a "public service facility" as opposed to "public administration offices?"

For example, would the Department of Motor Vehicles be considered a public service, or an administrative office?

What about the administrative headquarters of the Public Health Department?

These offices combine some administrative features and some public service features.


Thanks! I hope this proposal will be approved once it is improved - Joseph



On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 7:26 AM SelfishSeahorse <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello everyone!

I am proposing a new tag, landuse=governmental, for marking land that
is used for governing:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dgovernmental

Regards
Markus



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

SelfishSeahorse
Thank you, Joseph and Warin, for your feedback!

On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 at 04:02, Joseph Eisenberg
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> However, I'm not sure that "governmental" is the best value for the landuse key. I think there would be a risk of mappers finding this tag in the editors and using it for all governnment-owned land, not just for administrative offices. [...] For these reasons, I believe the current tag "landuse=civic_admin" or "landuse=public_administration" are a little better. [...]

I'm aware of this risk and i was quite undecided between
landuse=governmental and landuse=public_administration.
public_administration isn't unproblematic too, because, if i'm not
mistaken, legislature facilities (places where
assembly/parliament/congress meets) and courts are another divisions
of government and don't belong to the public administration. But
dividing land used for governing would complicate mapping too much in
my opinion.

Any more opinions on that point? I'd be fine with changing the tag to
landuse=public_administration if other people think that this tag is
better.

> Also, in the proposal, it is stated that this tag will not be used for "Public service facilities"
> What is the definition of a "public service facility" as opposed to "public administration offices?"

You're right, 'public service facility' was unclear. I was thinking of
public service facilities that aren't directly involved in or
responsible for governing or organising the country, state or
municipality (or any other administrative division), but that have
other purposes like educating people, caring for their health,
offering them leisure activities etc. These should be excluded from
landuse=governmental.

Consequently, the Public Health Department would be
landuse=governmental, but not public health facilities like hospitals,
clinics or doctor's practices.

I've updated the proposal page.

On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 at 12:00, Warin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I think that there first need to be clear definitions of what are:
>
> public administration
> executive
> Legislature
> Judiciary (courts)

I'm going to try improving and adding definitions.

> and where things fit...
>
> police (national, state, municipal)
> military - excluded?
> libraries (national, state, municipal)
> schools - excluded?
> post office - excluded?

These facilities would all be excluded because they have different
purposes than governing or organising the country, state or
municipality. (I'm thinking of proposing landuse=educational later.)

> tax office
> vehicle licence office

These would be included.

> Do these all need to be combined? That does suit places where they are physically combined ... and if people then want to further identify them then sub tags could be used.
>
> As for the word to use... that will come, after the definitions?

There's landuse=institutional, [3] but this tag overlaps with
landuse=military which is already in use ... And i don't know how to
name such a land use differently.

[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dinstitutional

I suggest to tag the main use for places with mixed land use, probably
the land use that uses the most space. For example, if there's a small
police station or post office in a city hall, i'd still tag it
landuse=governmental or landuse=public_administration. There will
always be places with mixed land use, probably the most common example
being buildings with shops on the ground floor and apartments on the
upper floors.

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

marc marc
Le 14. 10. 18 à 14:42, SelfishSeahorse a écrit :
> public_administration isn't unproblematic too, because, if i'm not
> mistaken, legislature facilities (places where
> assembly/parliament/congress meets) and courts are another divisions
> of government and don't belong to the public administration.

you 're right.

> But dividing land used for governing would complicate mapping too much

why not ? school/education and military already exist.
office also have already have landuse=commercial
and we may add a subtag like commercial=government.
so maybe we only need landuse=executive legislature judicial

Regards,
Marc
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

SelfishSeahorse
Hi!

On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 at 17:16, marc marc <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > But dividing land used for governing would complicate mapping too much
>
> why not ? school/education and military already exist.

Because at least offices of the public administration and the
executive body are often located in the same building.

> office also have already have landuse=commercial
> and we may add a subtag like commercial=government.
> so maybe we only need landuse=executive legislature judicial

commercial=government is a contradiction. Note that the wiki already
says that 'government services and businesses should not use this tag
[landuse=commercial].':

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:landuse

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

SelfishSeahorse
On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 at 17:42, SelfishSeahorse <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Because at least offices of the public administration and the
> executive body are often located in the same building.

PS: Public administration is actually considered being a part of the executive.

Do you or anyone else have another idea how to name land used for
governing or how to solve this problem differently? It doesn't seem to
be an easy task ...

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

Paul Allen
On Sun, Oct 14, 2018 at 6:32 PM SelfishSeahorse <[hidden email]> wrote:

Do you or anyone else have another idea how to name land used for
governing or how to solve this problem differently?

landuse=scoundrels

--
Paul


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

Tom Hardy
In reply to this post by SelfishSeahorse
On Sunday, 14 October 2018 12:30:49 CDT SelfishSeahorse wrote:
 
> Do you or anyone else have another idea how to name land used for
> governing or how to solve this problem differently? It doesn't seem to
> be an easy task ...

Just to throw a couple more your way:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/622149574
landuse=garages is a staging area for city public works and county truck
repair, and

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/448672572
amenity=recycling is for city run recycling of yard waste

I couldn't find exactly appropriate tagging so I think I used a sort of least
appropriate method.

Is it time to consider some sort of general overhaul of landuse to make it
more flexible?

--
Tom Hardy <[hidden email]>




_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

Warin
On 15/10/18 05:34, Tom Hardy wrote:

> On Sunday, 14 October 2018 12:30:49 CDT SelfishSeahorse wrote:
>  
>> Do you or anyone else have another idea how to name land used for
>> governing or how to solve this problem differently? It doesn't seem to
>> be an easy task ...
> Just to throw a couple more your way:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/622149574
> landuse=garages is a staging area for city public works and county truck
> repair, and
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/448672572
> amenity=recycling is for city run recycling of yard waste

Humm think the trap is that we are identifying the operator - the government...
with the use/activity - 'administration' etc.

No solution .. yet.
Give it time, it will come.

Banks, large commercial firms have also land used for administration too ..



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

dieterdreist
So police stations are out? The ministry of defense is in, but the subordinate units of it are out (because military)? Courts are in? Prisons? Storage (e.g. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_strategic_petroleum_reserves )?

What about publicly owned companies? Does it matter whether they are 100% public, 50% or only 30%? 
Do I understand it correctly that this is for all governmental places regardless of the actual use, like offices, laboratories (public health department, other public institutes)?


Cheers, Martin 

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

SelfishSeahorse
In reply to this post by Tom Hardy
On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 at 20:35, Tom Hardy <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Just to throw a couple more your way:
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/622149574
> landuse=garages is a staging area for city public works and county truck
> repair, and
>
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/448672572
> amenity=recycling is for city run recycling of yard waste
>
> I couldn't find exactly appropriate tagging so I think I used a sort of least
> appropriate method.

The tagging seems fine to me.

> Is it time to consider some sort of general overhaul of landuse to make it
> more flexible?

Are you thinking of a system with sub-keys? Not sure if a general
overhaul is necessary, but land use (as well as land cover) certainly
has room for improvement: there are missing land uses (e.g. the
proposed governing area or forestry) and some of the current tags are
problematical and confusing (e.g. retail, which actually is a subset
of commercial).

By the way, if someone is interested, i've recently made a table
comparing land use categories from the UK's National Land Use Database
with OSM's landuse tags:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dgovernmental

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

SelfishSeahorse
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
Hi, Martin!

On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 at 01:09, Martin Koppenhoefer
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> So police stations are out? The ministry of defense is in, but the subordinate units of it are out (because military)? Courts are in? Prisons? Storage (e.g. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_strategic_petroleum_reserves )?
>
> What about publicly owned companies? Does it matter whether they are 100% public, 50% or only 30%?
> Do I understand it correctly that this is for all governmental places regardless of the actual use, like offices, laboratories (public health department, other public institutes)?

No, landuse=governmental is intended for the land used for organising
a country, state, municipality etc., that is, the 'core functions' of
a country, state, municipality etc., which are administering it,
making rules (laws), interpreting and executing them. Therefore only
public administration offices, meeting places of the assembly, courts
and offices of the executive are included in landuse=governmental.
Other governmental services that have different purposes than
organisation (e.g. police stations, prisons, public schools or
hospitals) are excluded from landuse=governmental.

landuse=governmental is about the purpose, that is governing, not the
operator or owner.

I agree that landuse=governmental isn't a very clear tag, but i
haven't been able to find a better one. As mentioned earlier, while
landuse=public_administration would be the most comprehensible, it is,
strictly speaking, only one part of the government. I'm not sure if it
would be a good idea to also tag meeting places of parliaments
landuse=public_administration. Instead defining separate landuse tags
for public administration, executive, parliament and courts doesn't
seem to be practicable either, as many countries don't distinguish
between law making (legislature/parliament) and law executing
(executive) and because at least public administration and executive
are often located within the same building (especially on municipal
level).

What you were thinking of sounds like the very broadly defined
landuse=institutional, which includes facilities with a wide variety
of purposes. [1] If we went that way, we would need sub-tags
(including for military area, i.e. landuse=institutional +
institutinal=military instead of landuse=military). However, the
problem of how to call the sub-tag(s) for public administration,
executive, parliament and courts were exactly the same as without
landuse=institutional + sub-tags.

[1]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:landuse%3Dinstitutional

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

SelfishSeahorse
On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 at 22:32, SelfishSeahorse <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> However, the problem of how to call the sub-tag(s) for public administration, executive, parliament and courts were exactly the same as without landuse=institutional + sub-tags.

PS: The only benefit i see of landuse=institutional + sub-tags are
mixed-use institutional areas (e.g. public administration offices and
a police station being located in the same building).

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

John Willis
In reply to this post by SelfishSeahorse


Javbw

> On Oct 16, 2018, at 5:32 AM, SelfishSeahorse <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> No, landuse=governmental is intended for the land used for organising
> a country, state, municipality etc., that is, the 'core functions' of
> a country, state, municipality etc., which are administering it,
> making rules (laws), interpreting and executing them.

One solution might be to split off

Landuse=Public_safety into its own landuse.

Many times, those are mostly private buildings with a small public facing section.

Landuse=public_safety would be generic enough to be for police stations, rangers, lifeguards, snow patrol, highway patrol, harbor patrol, fire stations, wildfire stations, and other "official" services offered to the public to ensure their Saftey.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

Graeme Fitzpatrick

On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 at 07:17, John Willis <[hidden email]> wrote:

Landuse=public_safety would be generic enough to be for police stations, rangers, lifeguards, snow patrol, highway patrol, harbor patrol, fire stations, wildfire stations, and other "official" services offered to the public to ensure their Saftey.

How about those "public safety" groups that are manned & operated by unpaid volunteers, often with minimum (or no) Govt funding?

Thanks

Graeme

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

John Willis


> On Oct 16, 2018, at 7:13 AM, Graeme Fitzpatrick <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> How about those "public safety" groups that are manned & operated by unpaid volunteers, often with minimum (or no) Govt funding?

A building dedicated to a volunteer fire department - where they keep the truck and the hoses - is still land used by a structure dedicated to public Saftey.

It may not be a giant police station or a multi-floor firehouse - yet all of them usually have dedicated land larger than building.

If the community depends of them for fire protection services - they are the "fire department".

I assume tagging for a fire station will have some kind of tagging to denote it's volunteer or irregular staffing situation.

Pulling them out of "landuse=governmental" seems to be a no-brainer, so making a tag for them would help more narrowly define landuse=governmental.


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

SelfishSeahorse
In reply to this post by Joseph Eisenberg
On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 at 04:02, Joseph Eisenberg
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> However, I'm not sure that "governmental" is the best value for the landuse key. I think there would be a risk of mappers finding this tag in the editors and using it for all governnment-owned land, not just for administrative offices. In North America, and in many developing countries, the national or local government owns large areas of land, including rangeland, forests, transportation facilities, and military areas, in addition to land uses for government offices.
>
> In North America, it is somewhat common to talk about "government land" or more specifically, "Federal land," "State land", and "Municipal land". But the only uses of "governmental land use" I've found are in phrases talking about "governmental land use policy", "governmental land use regulations", and "governmental land use decision making". In these cases, the phrase is talking about governments regulating all types of land use, including commercial, retail, residential and industrial.

I think if editors will name the landuse=governmental preset
'government premises', there won't be a high risk that people would
use this tag for land owned or regulated by the government.
Alternatively, renaming the tag landuse=government_premises (or
landuse=governmental_site) should clear up any ambiguities.

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

dieterdreist
Am Mi., 31. Okt. 2018 um 11:49 Uhr schrieb SelfishSeahorse <[hidden email]>:
I think if editors will name the landuse=governmental preset
'government premises', there won't be a high risk that people would
use this tag for land owned or regulated by the government.
Alternatively, renaming the tag landuse=government_premises (or
landuse=governmental_site) should clear up any ambiguities.



We should be very clear about whether the land is owned by the public, or used by the public. Landuse is a property for the current use, so landuse=governmental (or whatever is chosen) should indicate used by the government. This could be private property (and rented), or public property.

WRT to Joseph's comment about "municipal, statal and federal", I would welcome adding a property for the level (if a generic level is chosen for landuse), maybe "admin_level" would suit best?

How will we deal with uses shared by bodies of different levels in the hierarchy, e.g. a site which is used together by federal and state entities (e.g. on different building levels, or in cooperation).

Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - landuse=governmental

SelfishSeahorse
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 12:00, Martin Koppenhoefer
<[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> WRT to Joseph's comment about "municipal, statal and federal", I would welcome adding a property for the level (if a generic level is chosen for landuse), maybe "admin_level" would suit best?

This seems like a good idea.

> How will we deal with uses shared by bodies of different levels in the hierarchy, e.g. a site which is used together by federal and state entities (e.g. on different building levels, or in cooperation).

I think it should be save to add all admin_level's separated by semicolons.

Regards
Markus

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
12