Proposal talk:Practitioners

Duplication

Resolved

A few users on the community forum have expressed concern over duplicate for tags such as operator=* and owner=* overlapping with this proposal.

If operator=* is used for the company, there will be an overlap and redundancy between operator=* and practitioners=* for “sole proprietorships” or “partnerships”. This causes a question of whether to fill in both.
— Kovposch, RFC in the Community Forum

I’ve been using owner=* a lot for the names of the practitioners whose nameplates are posted at professional offices, as well as name=* when the owner’s name serves as the name of the establishment, and operator=* when the owner has formed an organization of any sort to operate the business.
— Minh Nguyen, RFC in the Community Forum

Community input is valuable and I see this as a potential overlap, however the practitioners=* proposal is written in such a way that the tags are complimentary and may reflect a practitioners dual or multiple roles within a even if the is the same. I am open to further discussion on this topic but will mark this as resolved for the time being unless further discussion continues. -- GA Kevin (talk) 01:41, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Count Subtag

Resolved: Added to proposal.

Possibility of adding practitioners:count=* with a of a whole numerical digit. Such a tag would describe the number of practitioners in a given which is different than the established capacity=* which is more total population allowed in a . -- GA Kevin (talk) 01:41, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

I forgot there is a general staff_count:*=* Proposal:Healthcare_2.0
—— Kovposch (talk) 19:25, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Unicode Character Limit

Resolved: Known potential restriction.

In the elements documentation, there exists a technical character limit of 255 characters for all and . This also applies to semi-colon delimited lists so there exists a potential issue where a has a large list of practitioners=*, exceeding the technical limit. The proposal subtags practitioners:primary=* and practitioners:support=* aim to mitigate this by providing 2 fields for a total of 510 characters. This should be sufficient for most needs, but community comment is welcome on other solutions to this, using semi-colon delimited lists or not. -- GA Kevin (talk) 02:08, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Clarifying Secondary Practitioners

Resolved: Proposal updated.

Minh Nguyen in the community forum brought up a concern surrounding the proposed practitioners:support=* tag. Specifically, despite a warning in the rationale, some users may use the proposed field as a list of staff rather than a list of primary practitioners and their understudy or apprentice. The following suggestion was made:

I’d suggest choosing an example that better illustrates the need for tagging “secondary” practitioners, such as a law firm’s partners and associates. I’d also suggest finding a more concrete example with a demonstration of the sources a mapper could realistically use to obtain this information.
— Minh Nguyen, RFC in the Community Forum

Would changing the wording to apprentice, understudy, or inductee make more sense or would the community advocate for the removal of a distinction with a knowledge of the limitations on character length also discussed here? -- GA Kevin (talk) 19:08, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

@GA Kevin: No, tagging apprentices would exacerbate the issue. We aren't making an org chart. – Minh Nguyễn ^💬 20:24, 11 January 2025 (UTC)