Proposed features/Tag:amenity=ranger station

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The Feature Page for the approved proposal ranger_station is located at Tag:amenity=ranger_station.
ranger_station
Status: Approved (active)
Proposed by: brycenesbitt
Tagging: amenity=ranger_station
Applies to: node,area
Definition: An official building housing police, visitor information, permit services, for a park or natural area.
Rendered as: Icon drawn from USA NPS official set.
Drafted on: 2013-08-05
RFC start: 2013-08-06
Vote start: 2013-08-20
Vote end: 2013-10-01
Public-images-osm logo.svg amenity = ranger_station
NPS ranger station.svg
DescriptionTranslate.svg
An official building housing police, visitor information, permit services, etc. Edit this description in the wiki page. Edit this description in the data item.
GroupTranslate.svg: Amenities
Used on these elementsTranslate.svg
may be used on nodesshould not be used on waysmay be used on areasshould not be used on relations
Useful combinationTranslate.svg
StatusTranslate.svgapproved

WikidataTranslate.svg

Purpose

For showing the location of a ranger station or park visitor center. Ranger stations offer a variety of services such as police, visitor information, permits, exhibits, etc. This may be mapped as a single point, or as an area on a single building or group of buildings.

See also

External Links

History & Tag Migration

Imports by the US National Park Service used amenity=police for Ranger Stations, prior to this proposal. If this tag is approved it is the the proposer's intent to retag most clearly identifiable amenity=police nodes to amenity=ranger_station, if they reside within a USA state or National Park. This may catch the odd police only station, but the typical case should be correct. See Mechanical_Edits/Bryce_C_Nesbitt.

Voting

Voting closed

Voting on this proposal has been closed.

It was approved with 24 votes for and 0 votes against.

  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. -- --N76 21:52, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Glassman (talk) 21:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Lyx (talk) 22:13, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. CS Mur (talk) 22:35, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Brycenesbitt (talk) 22:45, 20 August 2013 (UTC) (tag proponent)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Janko (talk) 22:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Ansis (talk) 01:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Mmaki (talk) 02:42, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. kerryg (talk) 05:42, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Tekim (talk) 11:40, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Milesbarger (talk) 12:46, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Russell Deffner (talk) 13:48, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Nateirwin (talk) 15:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Makella (talk) 15:50, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Dothandave (talk) 15:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. DTWilder (talk) 16:13, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal.--voschix (talk) 16:29, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Skorasaurus (talk) 16:40, 21 August 2013 (UTC) My only question or suggestion: Why would a building=yes tag also be needed if the closed way already has amenity=ranger_station on it ? If there's a building whose only use is as a ranger station, then as I understand, adding the building=yes is redundant.
It's true that the remark about "building=yes" could be avoided. For a big station with 2 or more buildings, we can trace a surrounding polygon tagged with "amenity=*" and keep "building" in the building polygones inside (or the station is fenced). See amenity=school doc as a guideline. --Pieren (talk) 17:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
amenity=fire_station recommends the building=yes approach, and the rendering engines use both tags. Brycenesbitt (talk) 06:38, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
The same remark applies for all features, including fire stations, when the feature is more than one building. --Pieren (talk) 13:44, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Dchiles (talk) 17:35, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Fschmidt (talk) 08:55, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. tpcolson (talk) 12:42, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Rarspace01 (talk) 11:26, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. LordOfMaps (talk) 12:43, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. AlaskaDave (talk) 01:45, 26 September 2013 (UTC)