Proposal talk:Emergency=disaster response

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Please also check further discussion at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Rescue_Stations --Fizzie41 (talk) 05:46, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

More discussion can be found in the community forum --Os-emmer (talk) 19:51, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Disaster response and civil protection

I can only talk about the German Federal Agency for Technical Relief (THW), because I'm not familiar with other nation's emergency legal systems. In Germany, disaster response is not a federal task, but one of the individual member states. Civil protection, however, is a federal task, delegated to THW. So tagging a THW facility with emergency=disaster_response is incorrect. Additionally, the widely used term technical fits better, as THW is an agency for technical relief. This seems to be in row with some criticism of the above mentioned rescue_stations proposal. Trying to unify tagging shouldn't come with a loss of information. --PVitt (talk) 13:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for that. That's actually a question that I've asked a couple of times over this process, but haven't had a response - what is "Technical Rescue / Relief" (I've seen references to both)? Certainly not trying to reduce the amount of information available, just get it all together in one spot, where it can be easily found! --Fizzie41 (talk) 00:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
@PVitt - we do not want to tag administrstive hierarchies here. So, when the task of disaster response is delegated to the Technisches Hilfswerk THW, why would the tagging be incorrect?--Polarbear w (talk) 19:22, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Evenn though this section idled for over 2 years I would like to continue it. I think the problem meantined here is the exact meaning of "disaster response" and "civil protection". Depending on how you interpret these terms and how you translate them into German, they get different meanings. I think if we use "disaster response" in the sense of "responding to a disaster", the German THW is defenatly part of it, even though the German federal states still have theire own kind of disaster response services. @PVitt, do you agree, that the German THW fits the definition? --Os-emmer (talk) 17:28, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

As there was no feedback in over a week neighter here nor on @PVitt's talk page I assume this objection is not relevant anymore. I mark this section as resolved. If anyone disagrees feel free to remove the resolved template below and replace it with your comment. --Os-emmer (talk) 23:58, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Resolved: --Os-emmer (talk) 23:58, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

usage in OSM

I have mapped a building using this tag. I don't believe that there is an existing tag appropriate for this purpose. please go forward with this proposal, you have my support. --SherbetS (talk) 22:25, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

As this is just a comment for supporting the proposal and not a question or counter argument, I am marking it as resolved now. --Os-emmer (talk) 09:47, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Resolved: --Os-emmer (talk) 09:47, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Australian SES

In Australia, the SES (State Emergency Service) is not a single nationwide organisation, but each state controls their own version of it: https://www.ses.org.au/, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Emergency_Service, so there would need to be a Wikidata entry for each of them e.g. Queensland is https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q17054236.

Naming will also vary, depending on each unit, but the most common versions are <city/town/area name> SES/State Emergency Service Unit/Group, or SES/State Emergency Service <city/town/area name> Unit/Group.

You should also make mention of the updated proposal on the Tagging Mailing List & Community forum.

Good luck! --Fizzie41 (talk) 00:25, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. I think this will help to improve the proposed tagging of the SES.

What do you mean with "You should also make mention of the updated proposal on the Tagging Mailing List & Community forum."? I am quite new here in the wiki.

--Os-emmer (talk) 05:41, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Here's the Community forum, where a lot of discussion takes place: https://community.openstreetmap.org/. I've now created a new thread to mention that this proposal has been refreshed: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/refreshed-proposal-emergency-disaster-response/101036. Please talk to everybody else & put your thoughts & suggestions out there for others. & don't take it personally if people say "That's wrong"! Unfortunately, that happens all the time :-( --Fizzie41 (talk) 06:27, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
The fact that there are different SES-Organisations in Australia can be expressed by using the exact names in the operator=*-tag. The meantioned communication in the forum got started months ago. The RFC of this proposal got communicated in the community forum and the tagging mailing list. I now mark this section as "resolved".
Resolved: --Os-emmer (talk) 14:43, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Tagging

Not sure on the best way to work tagging?

As you've said emergency=disaster_response, but how should it go after that?

Do we just leave it at that, & rely on name & operator to distinguish individual groups e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1112815698, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9661821977

Or try to break it down into each country > state > group e.g. disaster_response=AU + AU=State Emergency Service + SES=Queensland + Qld_SES=Gold Coast (which is impossibly cumbersome & messy!) --Fizzie41 (talk) 00:44, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I proposed emergency_service=THW for the German THW and emergency_service=SES for the Austrailian SES. This way we can group all organisations with emergency=disaster_response and maybe amenity=emergency but still be able to distinguish between the organisations. Ofcause we need more values for emergency_service=* for all the other organisations. What do you think anout this proposal? --Os-emmer (talk) 05:39, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

[W]NSW SES (Q7011790) is an "instance of" [W]SES (Q7011790) . That's how Wikidata works. —— Kovposch (talk) 07:04, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the recent interest. I think we do not need an amenity=* key in this context. Having emergency=* as top level is sufficient and keeps load off the amenity=* key. Looking at emergency=* it does not require an amenity=* key for other uses.

For the operator, I'd favour the operator=* key since it is universally used in OSM. Things like 'name' and default tags such as address should be kept out of the proposal, as they are default anyway and make the proposal look more complicated.

In my experience, the community is more likely to agree to a simple key-value pair than to a complicated tagging structure, which might evolve naturally afterwards. --Polarbear w (talk) 21:05, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Resolved: The meantioned issues where used to improve the proposal. The proposal does not contain a detailed tagging scheme anymore. A discussion for a detailed tagging scheme is now part of the future plan. Os-emmer (talk) 14:06, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

About goal ambiguity and disaster unified response teams

I think many countries are similar because modern countries often share experiences, but let’s take the case of South Korea. (I’m not sure I can explain it properly with my short English skills, but I’ll give it a shot, so please bear with me.)

There are many different types of disasters, and each one has its own response organization, but in modern times I know disaster response as unified response. In a large or complex disaster, a response team will be formed, and the response team will coordinate all relevant organizations. But, disaster response teams do not have any resources. Depending on the type of disaster, they take resources from “A” organization, “A-2”, and “B-1” and “B-2” from “B” organization. This means that “A-2” is a redundant attribute that originally belonged to “A” and is mobilized for a specific disaster. In other words, “A-2”, “B-1”, and “B-2” don’t have independent properties, but are each subproperties of “A” and “B”, and additionally have the property of disaster response.

Not every country in the world is like this, but at least many that I know of respond to disasters this way. If I’ve misunderstood something, please let me know. --깨몽/dreamy (talk) 04:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

The South Korean CDSCHQ got discussed in detail, see here. There was consense that this type of organisation is different from the type of organisation we would like to tag with emergency=disaster_response. The CDSCHQ only manages forces of different organisations but does not do actual work in the field. I am marking this as resolved to make the page easyer to understand. If you do not agree or have any questions feel free to say so. --Os-emmer (talk) 14:38, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
Resolved: --Os-emmer (talk) 14:38, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Information removed from proposal page

Resolved: This section describes the idea of a detailed and complex tagging scheme, that is now not part of the proposal. A discussion for a detailed tagging scheme is now part of the future plan. Os-emmer (talk) 14:19, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Classification of organisations

--Os-emmer (talk) 12:38, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Please note that the table got expanded and refined several times. It was/is just a base for discussion and not the overview of organisations that match emergency=disaster_response. --Os-emmer (talk) 14:30, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Default tags?

Is it really useful to list this address/contact tags? And what is meant exactly by "default" here? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:04, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you a lot for showing interest in this proposal.

I think someone else already meantioned that this listing should probably be removed. I added it to the proposal because I wanted to make clear that these tags should also be used. But maybe it is just clear that something that has an address should be mapped with all the addr:*=* tags. As you are not the first one who thought this should maybe be removed I just removed the section to simplify the proposal. --Os-emmer (talk) 21:37, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I would not go into this - for example whether addr:country=* should be used is controversial and you really do not want to deal with contact: prefix debate Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:07, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Thats true. This basic addr:*=* and contact:*=* discussion is bigger than this proposal. I just added a new post to the discussion in the forum with more on topic qustions. Maybe you want to have a look. :) --Os-emmer (talk) 11:44, 5 November 2023 (UTC)


Resolved: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:46, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

emergency_service=technical

Not sure if we need to include that into deprecation. It's a subtag that the particular response service is technical, in contrast to maybe logistical, providing food and shelter etc.? --Polarbear w (talk) 18:07, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

If it's needed, it should fall into eg emergency_service=disaster_response + service_branch=technical https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/initial-discussion-possible-new-way-of-mapping-emergency-service-areas-locations/106563
So emergency_service=technical can be dropped.
—— Kovposch (talk) 06:45, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

I am not sure about the meaning of emergency_service=* in general. There are 6 values with 10 or more uses. I tried to understand the meaning of them:

tag count comment
emergency_service=technical 814 This is the only documented value. It is de facto a synonym for operator=Technisches Hilfswerk (THW).
emergency_service=water 241 Probably a synonym for emergency=lifeguard.
emergency_service=ambulance 102 Probably a synonym for emergency=ambulance_station
emergency_service=mountain 45 Probably a synonym for emergency=mountain_rescue
emergency_service=lifeguard 28 Probably a synonym for emergency=lifeguard
emergency_service=land 16 Meaning unclear to me.

As soon as we have emergency=disaster_response I see no benefit in emergency_service=technical. The meaning would be in my understanding the same. And the other not documented values seem to have synonyms too. So maybe deprecating emergency_service=* completely would be worth a discussion. But that would be beyond this porposal. --Os-emmer (talk) 13:14, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

emergency_service=water could possibly also be replaced by emergency=water_rescue, really depending if the unit involved is dedicated to rescuing swimmers off the beach, or sailors from vessels in distress? --Fizzie41 (talk) 22:42, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
Rescue of swimmers off the beach is already tagged by emergency=lifeguard. I see no point in the undocumented key emergency_service=* as it's values have been/could be incorporated in the key emergency=* Warin61 (talk) 11:44, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm not particularly keen on keeping emergency_service, so if you think it is better to deprecate it, fine. The experience is just that the more a proposal of a new tag is trying to deprecate others, the more no-votes it gets. --Polarbear w (talk) 16:01, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

I understand that point. Even though the tag is as of now not usefull because it is defacto a synonym for operator=Bundesanstalt Technisches Hilfswerk (THW) it may be usefull with a changed definition. Maybe the discussion about the future of this tag should be part of the Future plan. How do others see this? --Os-emmer (talk) 11:54, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

No one seems to realy want to keep this tag/key. The only argument meantioned to not include this tag into deprecation is that it makes the proposal bigger than absolutely necessary. While I agree with that I think that we should deprecate the tag anyways since otherwise someone could argue that emergency=disaster_response is a synonym for emergency_service=technical. And the goal of this proposal is to find a unified tagging scheme for disaster response stations. So getting rid of not needed tags schould be included. Does anyone disagree? --Os-emmer (talk) 13:50, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

As no strong opinion to keep emergency_service=technical was meantioned I think we can keep including it into deprecation. I am marking this topic as resolved. --Os-emmer (talk) 02:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Resolved: --Os-emmer (talk) 02:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Australia NSW Volunteer Rescue Association

In addition to the Australian SES there is also the NSW VRA - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VRA_Rescue_NSW While it appears similar to the SES some 'members' come from clubs e.g. 4WD clubs. amateur radio operators. Warin61 (talk) 11:32, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

After reading the wikipedia article about the VRA it seems like this organisation could fit emergency=disaster_response. But what exactly are the tasks of the VRA? There is a picture on the wikipedia page with someone with the words "ambulance rescue" on his back. Does the VRA provide medical help? Or more technical support?
I only found 1 station of the VRA mapped. Then there is this mast. The station is tagged with amenity=rescue_station. Are there currently more stations mapped on OSM? What tags do they use at the moment? --Os-emmer (talk) 13:16, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
Some 46 presently mapped in OSM. See https://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=%22operator%22%3D%22VRA+Rescue+NSW%22+in+Australia&R Some idea of the members? 42 General Land Rescue Squads, 2 Specialist rescue squads; Alpine Rescue and Cave Rescue, 8 Support Squads including Communications, Grief and Loss Support, Aerial Patrols, and First Aid. Warin61 (talk) 10:56, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. As of now they seem to be using amenity=rescue_station. According to the wiki "it is recommended to use a more specific tagging if available". Do I understand you right, that different stations are specialised for different tasks like mountain rescue or first aid? Wouldn't it be more fitting to tag them with emergency=mountain_rescue or emergency=ambulance_station? --Os-emmer (talk) 18:01, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Most would be 'land rescue' usually vehicle crashes and those usually have limited first aid training and equipment. I don't think the single mountain nor single cave rescue groups are mapped as yet. And the communications group is probably not mapped either. One of the island groups has first aid training due to the delays in getting that help there, I'm not certain what else they offer. Warin61 (talk) 10:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
If I rewrite the definition as a checklist we have this:
  1. non-military organisation
  2. has the main objective to help the civil population during and after natural or anthropogenic disasters by working in the affected area
  3. does not have firefighting as their main competence
  4. does not have medical service as their main competence
  5. place is used for storing and repairing equipment (hand tools, trucks, boats, safety gear, etc…)
  6. place is used for training the members (volunteers or paid ones)
  7. place is used for doing administrative tasks
  8. place where the members start a mission after being alerted to an incident.
I think number 1, 3 and 4 are a match. Are Number 5, 6, 7 and 8 also a match?
For Number 2 I am realy not sure. If the unit mainly responds to mountain rescue incidents, then probably emergency=mountain_rescue would fit better. If the unit is not specalized to mountain rescue, then emergency=disaster_response would maybe be an option. I think the core question is: Does the unit respond to disasters in general or only to one specific type of disaster? If there is a more specific tag that matches the unit it is probably better to use the other tag. --Os-emmer (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Devolving into a broad discussion of the proposal. If used for administration, planning, coordination then it is an office and should be tagged as an office=*. Training? amenity=training, while stipulated 'public' I would question that not being tagged with access=*. If this tag is used only for units that can respond to 'general' disasters then some SES units would not fit - some specialise in one form of disaster. How many disaster types have to be catered for for a rescue base to qualify??? Warin61 (talk) 07:20, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
I partly agree with you. If the facility is used only for administration, offie=* would probably be the way to go. For facilitys soly used for administartion or training but not as the base from where a mission is started, emergency=disaster_response does not fit. If you compare it to the tagging of police, not every facility of them is tagged as amenity=police. There is also for example police=academy.
I didn't know that there where specialised SES-units. Every station of the German THW always has a "Bergungsgruppe", a unit with a wide range of capabilatys. It has hydraulic stamps to lift concreet blocks in collapsed houses, chainsaws to cut away fallen trees, rope winches to move away heavy objects, a small water pump, a small electric generator for self suply and much more. On top of this, every THW station has at least one additional unit that is more specialised. For examlpe a unit that has 200kVA electric generators to rebuild a power grid in case of a black out or a pumping unit that is capable of pumping ca. 40000l/min of water.
Is there a minimum level of capabilatys that every SES station has?
To get more input from other people in this topic I asked for comments in the forum.--Os-emmer (talk) 22:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
According to this post from @Fizzie41 probably all SES units are equipped and trained to provide basic assistance in disasters.
I can't give a finite answer to your question about the number of "disaster types" a stations needs to cater to qualify as emergency=disaster_response. But here we can use duck tagging. If it looks like a disaster response station, call it emergency=disaster_response, if it looks like something else, use another tag.
To my limited understanding, the stations of the VRA fit this proposal and could be tagged with emergency=disaster_response. --Os-emmer (talk) 23:49, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Even though at least some, maybe even all the VRA-stations fit emergency=disaster_response, I would like to not include this organisation into the examples. The reason is that it is a quite small organisation (32 squads, according to wikipedia) and we already have an Australian example, the SES. Are your comments resolved/questions answered with this? --Os-emmer (talk) 21:34, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

As there where no response to my last comments and no opposition to my question if this topic is resolved, I am marking it as resolved now. If it is not resolved feel free to oppose to this and tell me about your concerns. --Os-emmer (talk) 09:50, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Resolved: --Os-emmer (talk) 09:50, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Affected data consumers

Here is a list of data consumers/servies who should be contacted once emergency=disaster_response is approved, to prevent theire products from breaking unexpectedly. If you know more of them feel free to add them to the list. --17:45, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

From Taginfo: apparently, OSMAnd and SomeoneElse's maps render emergency=ses_station, and WikiData has it as the OSM tag for Q852008. The other two deprecated tags do not have anyone using them listed (just generic amenity= and emergency_service= handling). Osmuser63783 (talk) 18:18, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Email to OsmAnd is sent --Os-emmer (talk) 17:18, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
SomeoneElse is informed via community forum post --Os-emmer (talk) 17:18, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
I am not sure how to correct the wikidata thing. I do not think that "civil protection" should be completly represented by emergency=disaster_response as there is are more aspects of it that are not fitting this tag. If anyone knows how to correct this feel free to do so. --Os-emmer (talk) 17:18, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Proposal_talk:Emergency%3Ddisaster_response&oldid=2653511"