Proposed features/Awards and ratings
|Proposal status:||Rejected (inactive)|
|Proposed by:||Johan Jönsson|
|Applies to:||, , ,|
|Definition:||To show that a feature has an award or rating according to an <award_system>.|
To show that a feature has an award or rating according to an <award_system>. This is a secondary tag put on existing tagged nodes, typically hotel, restaurants and other public facilities.
The award is something that is bestowed on the feature on the basis of merit. Usually there are some kind of system with a jury or some other means to examine and rate the feature and then decide what features that are good enough to get the award. Usually there are an organization behind the award-system, sometimes the name of the awards are more commonly known than the organization behind the idea of the award.
The same goes with ratings, sometimes the rating-system or rating-scale are more known than the organization upholding the system. See also award in a dictionary.
Features awarded with an award have been found to hold a certain level of service and quality. These places should be in a travellers interest to find.
An american beach resort awarded the blue flag in the blue flag system (the only award given is the blue flag so the scale is true/false)
The water at the same beach is rated as having 3 stars in the american NRDC-system
It is the Foundation for Environmental Education (FEE) that stands behind the blue flag-system, http://www.blueflag.org. In this case I think it is clear that award:blue_flag should be used and not award:fee. One potential problem is that the denomination "blue flag" could be in use in other award-systems, but that would most probable not be the name of the award-system, more likely one kind of award (the value and not the key) "award:<other_award_system>=blue_flag"
The National Resources Defence Council (NRDC) rates beaches in USA, http://www.nrdc.org/water/oceans/ttw/beach-ratings.asp. In this case the rating-system has no own name, although they use stars, so I find it fit to use the organization-name award:NRDC. One potential problem would be if NRDC issues a lot of awards on different things, hopefully it could become clear which one, based on the feature tagged.
A german hotel awarded 3 stars in guide rogue Michelin (the scale of the michelin system is 1/2/3 stars)
The same hotel awarded 4 stars in the endorsed european system, hotelstarsunion (the scale of the hotelstar system is 1/2/3/4/5 stars)
There already exists an widely used scheme for tagging hotel ratings with stars, stars=*. This is a problem for this new proposal.
Added to existing features describing what is awarded.
- award:<name_of_award_system> = <award_in_the_system>
- award:<name_of_rating_system> = <rating_in_the_system>
where the text with brackets, <..>, must be replaced by a documented value.
The voting is CLOSED since 2013-06-16 This proposal was open for ´´voting´´ 2013-06-02 to 2013-06-16. The result of the voting was five votes of approval and seven votes against and the proposal was REJECTED. The votes against wanted a system to add dates of the awards and wanted this to be on another site that could be used in a "data mash-up".
Please continue the discussion on the discussion-side
- I approve this proposal. already using this --Dieterdreist (talk) 18:01, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. the namespace makes it much easier to understand than just using the name of the award by itself (e.g. I had no idea that "blue flag" was the name of an award) --Tordanik 18:52, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. This seems to be a better idea for a mashup or overlay given the subjectiveness and lack of authoritative source. Paul Johnson (talk) 19:58, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. -- Why the namespace? Why not just blue_flag=yes ? People are already using it -- Harry Wood (talk) 23:44, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal.CS Mur (talk) 00:29, 3 June 2013 (UTC) Awards or rating tags also need dates, The big ratings groups issue them annually and they change. Ratings from user review sites also change - often from very good when friends of the onwer first rate it, then sink as the number of reviews grow. Description and examples need dates.
- I approve this proposal. erkinalp 17:52, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. Did you check if you are allowed by Michelin to collect their awards ? They sell guidebooks for that and risk is high for copyright infrigement (problem is not to save a award for a single restaurant but really the fact that we recreate the collection of awards published by Michelin). --Pieren (talk) 19:42, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. Often awarded yearly. Too difficult to maintain. Issue of licence of the award. Mashup ? JB (talk) 14:26, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. Too hard to maintain. If permission was granted this should be a mashup or a data sync effort, not a cut & paste job. Brycenesbitt (talk) 03:06, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. Some/most of this information is better done as a mashup from a separate database, it is too ephemeral and subjective for OSM. Nfgusedautoparts (talk) 21:04, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. It's a good idea to tell anyone reading the tags that the weird suffix part of the tag refers to some "award". As a concept I like it. Mappers will keep it updated in their daily area, just as they update the amenities and other features - it's not a shortcoming of the proposed tag, but a shortcoming of the mapping community, if the tag is sometimes outdated. Users are not allowed to copy street names from other maps, yet nobody objects to the tag name=* because somebody might have to be educated not to copy it from unallowed sources. Alv (talk) 23:07, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. already using this --AmiciGiuseppe IT 19:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC)