Proposed features / landuse=open_defecation

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

Proposed features / landuse=open_defecation

Tagging mailing list
I have created a proposal page for landuse=open defecation.

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

Please review it, my wiki page editing skills have suffered from lack of use so it could do with a little tidy if anyone wants to.

Please discuss your thoughts here. The most controversial area is I am using the landuse tag rather than open_defication = yes. Please let me know which you would prefer.

All the best

Bob

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

Re: Proposed features / landuse=open_defecation

Joseph Eisenberg
Thanks for working on this, Bob,

Check out the page "Proposal_process" and in particular
Proposal_process#Creating_a_proposal_page to help improve the
formatting and make sure you've included important information.

Please clarify exactly what should be mapped with this new tag. Is
going to be added to whole villages, as suggested in the section about
"open_defecation=yes?

"It would have its own sign and could be used as a node or area.
Although it may be added to small villages to indicate if it is their
primary source of human waste disposal."

This would not be a good idea, since it's not possible for mappers to
confirm that every house or a majority of houses in a village lack
latrines or toilet. But the rest of the page suggests that this tag is
supposed to be applied to areas where there are visible signs, in
other words, there's human feces exposed on the ground?

There are a couple of problems with the proposed subtags. It's not
best practice to use abbreviations or uppercase letters in tags, so
instead of "ODA_" it should be "open_defecation_" or
"open_defecation:", if need.

"ODA_Radius_.." "ODA_area_size..." - The first two subtags are not
needed - the area can be mapped instead, and this provides the shape
and size just from the position of the nodes in the database.

"ODA_survey_date=" - there is already a tag for this, survey:date=* or
source:date=* , but it is recommended to add such information to the
changeset rather than to individual OSM objects.

"ODA_responsibility=" is unclear. What would this mean, and how would
a local mapper in confirm this information?

"ODA_proposed_solution=" - Unfortunately, this is not appropriate for
Openstreetmap. We map real, current features, not opinions, reviews or
suggestions, because such information is too subjective for individual
mappers to maintain.

"ODA_abandoned=yes/no" - generally features in Openstreetmap should be
current, so if an area that was used for open defecation in the past
has now been abandoned, and there are no signs "on the ground", then
it should be removed from the database. Some mappers use a prefix
"abandoned:" like "abandoned:landuse=open_defecation".

However, if the area is "disused" - not currently in use, but there
are still signs that it was recently used, and perhaps it's still a
health hazard because of the presence of decomposing human waste, this
could be tagged with "disused=yes".

ODA_survey_hazardous materials_data_weblink= - I'm not sure what is
intended by this tag. Perhaps the existing tag url=* would be
sufficient?

(I've also left these comments on the Talk page of the proposal, so we
can continue discussion there)

-Joseph Eisenberg

On 9/12/19, Bob Kerr via Tagging <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I have created a proposal page for landuse=open defecation.
>
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dopen_defecation
>
> Please review it, my wiki page editing skills have suffered from lack of use
> so it could do with a little tidy if anyone wants to.
>
> Please discuss your thoughts here. The most controversial area is I am using
> the landuse tag rather than open_defication = yes. Please let me know which
> you would prefer.
>
> All the best
>
> Bob

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

Re: Proposed features / landuse=open_defecation

Tagging mailing list
I have reworked the page as per your instructions, please let me know if it still needs more clarification.


Cheers

Bob

On 13 Sep 2019, at 03:13, Joseph Eisenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:

Thanks for working on this, Bob,

Check out the page "Proposal_process" and in particular
Proposal_process#Creating_a_proposal_page to help improve the
formatting and make sure you've included important information.

Please clarify exactly what should be mapped with this new tag. Is
going to be added to whole villages, as suggested in the section about
"open_defecation=yes?

"It would have its own sign and could be used as a node or area.
Although it may be added to small villages to indicate if it is their
primary source of human waste disposal."

This would not be a good idea, since it's not possible for mappers to
confirm that every house or a majority of houses in a village lack
latrines or toilet. But the rest of the page suggests that this tag is
supposed to be applied to areas where there are visible signs, in
other words, there's human feces exposed on the ground?

There are a couple of problems with the proposed subtags. It's not
best practice to use abbreviations or uppercase letters in tags, so
instead of "ODA_" it should be "open_defecation_" or
"open_defecation:", if need.

"ODA_Radius_.." "ODA_area_size..." - The first two subtags are not
needed - the area can be mapped instead, and this provides the shape
and size just from the position of the nodes in the database.

"ODA_survey_date=" - there is already a tag for this, survey:date=* or
source:date=* , but it is recommended to add such information to the
changeset rather than to individual OSM objects.

"ODA_responsibility=" is unclear. What would this mean, and how would
a local mapper in confirm this information?

"ODA_proposed_solution=" - Unfortunately, this is not appropriate for
Openstreetmap. We map real, current features, not opinions, reviews or
suggestions, because such information is too subjective for individual
mappers to maintain.

"ODA_abandoned=yes/no" - generally features in Openstreetmap should be
current, so if an area that was used for open defecation in the past
has now been abandoned, and there are no signs "on the ground", then
it should be removed from the database. Some mappers use a prefix
"abandoned:" like "abandoned:landuse=open_defecation".

However, if the area is "disused" - not currently in use, but there
are still signs that it was recently used, and perhaps it's still a
health hazard because of the presence of decomposing human waste, this
could be tagged with "disused=yes".

ODA_survey_hazardous materials_data_weblink= - I'm not sure what is
intended by this tag. Perhaps the existing tag url=* would be
sufficient?

(I've also left these comments on the Talk page of the proposal, so we
can continue discussion there)

-Joseph Eisenberg

On 9/12/19, Bob Kerr via Tagging <[hidden email]> wrote:
I have created a proposal page for landuse=open defecation.

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

Please review it, my wiki page editing skills have suffered from lack of use
so it could do with a little tidy if anyone wants to.

Please discuss your thoughts here. The most controversial area is I am using
the landuse tag rather than open_defication = yes. Please let me know which
you would prefer.

All the best

Bob

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

Re: Proposed features / landuse=open_defecation

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Joseph Eisenberg
open_defecation=yes seems a better tag for all situations where it is a significant phenomenon, while landuse=open_defecation would be ok for areas that are either designated for open defecation or are mainly used for it.


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

Re: Proposed features / landuse=open_defecation

Warin
In reply to this post by Joseph Eisenberg
On 13/09/19 12:13, Joseph Eisenberg wrote:

> Thanks for working on this, Bob,
>
> Check out the page "Proposal_process" and in particular
> Proposal_process#Creating_a_proposal_page to help improve the
> formatting and make sure you've included important information.
>
> Please clarify exactly what should be mapped with this new tag. Is
> going to be added to whole villages, as suggested in the section about
> "open_defecation=yes?
>
> "It would have its own sign and could be used as a node or area.
> Although it may be added to small villages to indicate if it is their
> primary source of human waste disposal."
>
> This would not be a good idea, since it's not possible for mappers to
> confirm that every house or a majority of houses in a village lack
> latrines or toilet. But the rest of the page suggests that this tag is
> supposed to be applied to areas where there are visible signs, in
> other words, there's human feces exposed on the ground?
>
> There are a couple of problems with the proposed subtags. It's not
> best practice to use abbreviations or uppercase letters in tags, so
> instead of "ODA_" it should be "open_defecation_" or
> "open_defecation:", if need.
>
> "ODA_Radius_.." "ODA_area_size..." - The first two subtags are not
> needed - the area can be mapped instead, and this provides the shape
> and size just from the position of the nodes in the database.
>
> "ODA_survey_date=" - there is already a tag for this, survey:date=* or
> source:date=* , but it is recommended to add such information to the
> changeset rather than to individual OSM objects.
>
> "ODA_responsibility=" is unclear. What would this mean, and how would
> a local mapper in confirm this information?

Possibly use the tag 'operator'?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:operator

In general would this not be some government administrative responsibility?
These can be mapped, see
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative

>
> "ODA_proposed_solution=" - Unfortunately, this is not appropriate for
> Openstreetmap. We map real, current features, not opinions, reviews or
> suggestions, because such information is too subjective for individual
> mappers to maintain.

There is some tagging for planed future things.
Most generally regard theses with some distaste and some things 'planned' are viewed as political promises that never get done.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix#Stages_of_birth

>
> "ODA_abandoned=yes/no" - generally features in Openstreetmap should be
> current, so if an area that was used for open defecation in the past
> has now been abandoned, and there are no signs "on the ground", then
> it should be removed from the database. Some mappers use a prefix
> "abandoned:" like "abandoned:landuse=open_defecation".
>
> However, if the area is "disused" - not currently in use, but there
> are still signs that it was recently used, and perhaps it's still a
> health hazard because of the presence of decomposing human waste, this
> could be tagged with "disused=yes".

Disused means it could be placed back into use with little effort.

If the OD is a disposal area and 'full' then this description does not suit.

I think if this OD is a transfer like facility then disused would suit, where as if it is a disposal facility then abandoned would be a better description.

>
> ODA_survey_hazardous materials_data_weblink= - I'm not sure what is
> intended by this tag. Perhaps the existing tag url=* would be
> sufficient?
>
> (I've also left these comments on the Talk page of the proposal, so we
> can continue discussion there)
>
> -Joseph Eisenberg
>
> On 9/12/19, Bob Kerr via Tagging <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I have created a proposal page for landuse=open defecation.
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/landuse%3Dopen_defecation
>>
>> Please review it, my wiki page editing skills have suffered from lack of use
>> so it could do with a little tidy if anyone wants to.
>>
>> Please discuss your thoughts here. The most controversial area is I am using
>> the landuse tag rather than open_defication = yes. Please let me know which
>> you would prefer.
>>
>> All the best
>>
>> Bob
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



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