Talk:Proposed features/social facility

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Which subkey for the offered services?

I think that service=* is not optimal because we already use this for different purposes. What about social_facility=* instead? This is the easiest way for the mapper and we do it in a lot of cases. -- Dieterdreist 09:58, 8 September 2010 (BST)

@Dieterdreist Just reworked the whole proposal. Thanks for your feedback (Kerosin 10:22, 8 September 2010 (BST))

Icon for workship

The icons are all very nice, but I dislike the one for workshops with the wheelchair, because these workshops are not for persons with physical impairments but for persons with mental problems. Lulu-Ann

Thanks, I guess there are different workshops. I know a workshop that employs people with (slight) physical impairments, but I think you're right most of them are primarily for people with mental handicap. Any idea how to illustrate a disabled? Kerosin 10:17, 16 September 2010 (BST)

Facility types

One way to define the types of a social facility is the level of care or service that is provided and whether people reside at the location. Further definition of who is served by the facility should be defined in the social_facility:for tag.

Here are 6 different types for consideration:


  • A group residential home organized around a certain demographic and provides social and medical services, such as leisure activities or meals. e.g. a retirement home for elderly:


  • A facility that provides temporary sleeping facilities or refuge from exposure to the environment. e.g. a homeless shelter:


  • A non-residential facility that supports the living needs of those who can't fully support themselves. e.g. assisting people with disabilities:




  • A non-residential facility that provides social welfare services such as job placement, veterans services, housing placement, wellness programs, daycare, leisure activities. e.g. outreach for veterans:


  • A non-residential facility that provides pre-packaged food or prepared meals

I'm not sure what to do with "workshops" as based on it's current definition "Workshops for disabled persons", you could define it as such:


Seanhorgan 14:10, 17 September 2010 (BST)


Hi, thank you for your proposal, I like the idea and the way you model this aspects :) Others and myself work currently on proposed features/Healthcare that adds annother healthcare=clinic. I recommend to use only one approach. I guess our one would be a good choice cause we can add more details, or? --!i! 12:54, 20 September 2010 (BST)

Hey !i!, Thanks. I'm quite not sure about using social_facility=clinic. Your tag is about medical facilities. I think there would be big problems if we merge our proposals. But our clinic-tag differs a bit, like we already mentioned "limited medical outpatient care". So maybe a co-existence of our tags is more useful?!
Maybe Seanhorgan could give a comment (he's the one who proposed adding clinic). Cheers - Kerosin 14:15, 21 September 2010 (BST)
Hmm well I would have no problems with both solutions but is it wise to confuse people with a clinictype A and B? In our proposal a healthcare=clinic is smaller than a hospital. If it is more smaller like a shared facility for multiple doctors we like to offer healthcare=centre. Wouldn't this cover your aspects? --!i! 18:10, 21 September 2010 (BST)

The purpose of social_facility=clinic was to identify facilities that focused primarily on delivering limited medical services at a reduced cost (or free) to disadvantaged members of the community. I really like all the detail in proposed features/Healthcare, so maybe we could use social_facility=healthcare instead. From there, a user could add more detail using the healthcare=* tags. Sean Horgan 16:39, 22 September 2010 (BST)

Sounds good and avoids the appealing to the enduser that we invented the wheek twice :) --!i! 06:43, 24 September 2010 (BST)

Kindergarten / Elderly care

I am not sure, so I ask before I vote. How should I tag:

  • a "kindergarten" for elderly persons/disabled persons

--vsandre 07:06, 26 September 2010 (BST)

A kindergarden for elderly persons? I would use "assisted_living". It's not a residential place, is it? e.g. amenity=social_facility; social_facility=assisted_living; social_facility:for=senior Kerosin 07:34, 27 September 2010 (BST)
I do not like the word and description of assisted_living. I hope to clarify my question:
The kindergarten is a place where seniors or handicapped people spend their day. They have to go there, because they are not able to live alone and their relatives have to go to work. Or they go there, because they love the change with games and chatting. Mostly the persons were picked up at home in the morning and delivered back in the evening by the day care agency.
I do not like assisted_living, because I associate living with a residential place. And I know places where seniors live in there own flat without a nurse. But if they need help, a nurse will be there within seconds.--vsandre 10:40, 27 September 2010 (BST)
We tried to be very clear in the definition that social_facility=assisted living is non-residential and it means your needs for adults as kerosin replied.
As it is clearly defined it is not a residential facility. Senior-Kindergarten like the one you described is a bit tricky because one the one hand it is optional to go there (some seniors go there in their leisure time), on the other hand seniors get picked up (that is an ambulatory service). Now I would use social_facility=outreach because it's rather a daycare centre then a ambulantory care facility! Sorry for wrong information, but you need to know more about a facility to classify it.
Now to your other example: Because you said there is a nurse that could be there in seconds, it is an ambulant service. So you would use social_facility=assisted_living in that context , although there might be some overlaps with group_home. But there're always hybrid forms. But that one is definitely assisted_living! - Kerosin 12:47, 27 September 2010 (BST)
In my understanding social_facility=outreach should only be used for offices which offers support to find the right nursing home or to help you filling out an application. Wikipedia does not help me.
Is social_facility=assisted_living in your definition a NOT non-residential facility, now?--vsandre 13:47, 27 September 2010 (BST)

That is not correct. Have look at this definition of outreach (paragraph 3) and read again the description made in the proposal. And I meant it is a non-residential facility, sorry if I didn't express myself clearly. I'm not a native speaker but Sean Horgan helped me finding colloquial and common terms. - Kerosin 14:21, 27 September 2010 (BST)
Agreed, outreach is not appropriate for an elderly day care. Sean Horgan 18:43, 28 September 2010 (BST)

If 'assisted living' is causing confusion, how about 'day services'? Take a look at wikipedia: Sean Horgan 18:43, 28 September 2010 (BST)

Changed assisted_living to a residential facility! Have a look at the proposal-page! Kerosin 17:19, 4 October 2010 (BST)

Charity shops

I am not sure, so I ask before I vote. How should I tag:

  • a shop (clothes, furniture, ...) for poor or disadvantaged people. Sometimes the things are free of charge or with very small price.

--vsandre 07:06, 26 September 2010 (BST)

I never heard of shops like that, but good that you're mentioning them. I had a look and there's already a tag that comprises that: shop=charity
e.g. amenity=shop; shop=charity; description=mainly selling clothes.
Any suggestions or questions? Kerosin 07:34, 27 September 2010 (BST)
shop=charity looks good but isn't well differentiated. Whats about social_facility=shop and shop=clothes, furniture or ...?--vsandre 10:40, 27 September 2010 (BST)
Yeah, the tag isn't very well differentiated. But I'm the opinion that shops like that don't fit to social_facility. These shops are not facilitating a social service to people. Of course they are made for disadvantaged people but they're still selling products to people. I would tend to make a proposal or suggestion at the shop-tag or maybe you have a idea to extend shop=charity. I guess most of these shops are projects that are managed by charities, they're not a typical facilities. Kerosin 12:47, 27 September 2010 (BST)
Ok thank you, I will think about it. --vsandre 13:47, 27 September 2010 (BST)
I agree with kerosin on this. If the shop gives stuff away for free, then maybe it could be a social service. In the US, there are many stores that sell clothes and supplies to disadvantaged people (e.g. Goodwill) but I don't think they should be tagged as a social facility. Sean Horgan 18:43, 28 September 2010 (BST)

Why Amenity namespace?

IMO building exclusive chains like: amenity=social_facility=* is not a good practice cause it forces a decision on what is the primary attribite of this facility ( school, university, hospital, place_of_worship, ...) and so will conflict with them sooner or later. In addition it adds no further Information. I propose to skip amenity=social_facility and just use social_facility=* as a stand-alone key as discribed in the proposal. I think it's worth getting this rank. Hasemann 13:18, 28 September 2010 (BST)

I agree with you concerning the use of amenity. amenity=* has a broad definition: This is the primary tag for useful and important facilities for visitors and residents. The talk page for amentiy raises the same issue you do but I'm reluctant to combine that debate with the primary goal of this proposal: the need to tag social facilities. Until then, it think it's best to follow the current convention. They really are two separate issues and if the OSM community decides to change amenity=* it would require just a few superficial changes to this proposal (and a bot to remove the features). I don't think we should hold up this effort due to a bigger issue that would be better dealt with directly. Sean Horgan 18:31, 28 September 2010 (BST)
I did not see a necessity to comment this again until Sean asked me to do it, cause my vote blocks the proposal. I agree, that the discussion about the amenity namespace should not hamper the proposal as a whole. In contrast i just want to prevent endless discussions by not dopping the valuable key/value social_facility into the big bag amenity. I do not agree that this can be reverted in the future with one coup. IMO a solution would be setting amenity=social_facility to optional but recommended, a bit late after the vote was closed.
On the other hand a xapi query covering germany and its neighbors gave 29 hits for [amenity=social_facility or social_facility=*] from which 8 (27.5%) only use the amenity tag without social_facility=*. 3 (10%) use social_facility=* without amenity=social_facility from which 1 results from a conflict with amenity=nursing_home. This is not representative but shows that amenity=social_facility is sufficient for a majority of people or they use the native solution if a conflict appears. If my vote is the only reason preventing the proposal from going to approved i will revert it --Hasemann 16:48, 19 October 2010 (BST)
I am fine with stating that amenity=social_facility is optional but recommended. Let me check with Kerosin and the tagging community about such a change. Sean Horgan 21:44, 21 October 2010 (BST)

Correct way to designate a women's shelter?

Am I correct in assuming that the contents of the table called "whom is served by the facility" are just examples and not a definitive list? I'm trying to understand how to designate a women's shelter and I'm assuming from the examples given that it should be something like this:


Is this correct? Also, can a given facility have multiple "social_facility:for" tags if it serves multiple groups?
Steevithak (talk) 04:03, 29 July 2013 (UTC)