Stephen Hope wrote: >Sent: 15 October 2009 3:01 AM >To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools >Subject: Re: [Tagging] schools > >I think the operator tag needs some careful documentation if you're >going to use it this way. > >Take this local (to me) school as an example >www.stjosephsbrackenridge.qld.edu.au I'll be mapping it's area soon. > >This is a Catholic Primary School. If I used operator tag, I'd put >Catholic Church or similar, not QLD Education Department. The building >is on church owned grounds, the church pays the staff. They do accept >some assistance from the government (I think), but it is a private >school. To me, the Education Department is the certifying/controlling >body, not the operator of this school. They would be the operator of >government run schools, however. > >It may be that you're talking about a different situation where the >County Council actually owns and runs the schools, but sub-lets some >of the work to other bodies. But if you're just talking about who is >the certifying body for the school, I think operator is the wrong term >- it's likely to cause confusion.
This is relatively straightforward tagging issue if you think of the physical building/land and its use as two separate sets of tags. You can tag the building and land with an owner=, landlord= or whatever tag that best describes this. Then using operator= to describe the tenant (or indeed use tenant=). If there are more parties in the chain then its not so difficult to think of appropriate tags. And as you say, if the role is governance, then an administrator= tag might work. Cheers Andy > >Stephen > > >2009/10/15 David Earl <da...@frankieandshadow.com>: >> operator=Somewhereshire County Council >> >school:level=early|first|nursery|infant|junior|primary|prep|secondary|terti >ary|special|referral >> >school:status=independent|c_of_e_aided|c_of_e_voluntary_controlled|communit >y|foundation|inter_church_aided|non_denominational >> |roman_catholic_aided >> >> I hope operator is largely uncontroversial as the operator tag is >> already widely used in other contexts, though I'm sure someone will find >> the need to argue about it. >> > >_______________________________________________ >Tagging mailing list >Tagging@openstreetmap.org >http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
