Proposed features/contractor

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Contractor
Status: Rejected (inactive)
Tagging: contractor=*
Statistics:

Drafted on: 2017-02-21
RFC start: 2018-03-01
Vote start: 2018-03-18
Vote end: 2018-04-01

Proposal

This tag would be used to name the contractor who built a building or other structure.

Rationale

Similar to the architect tag, this information is an important part of understanding the built environment.

Examples

Turner, Balfour Beatty, Gilbane, Swinerton, Hunt, etc. Tag should contain only the original General Contractor who built the building.

Tagging

contractor=*

Applies to

Ways and Areas

Rendering

This tag would not be rendered in default maps

Features/Pages affected

This new tag would only add additional information to existing features.

External Discussions

Comments

Please comment on the discussion page.

Voting

Voting closed

Voting on this proposal has been closed.

It was rejected with 1 vote for, 6 votes against and 0 abstentions.

  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. What Csmale said is correct: the contractors may be more than one, so deal with the construction of different parts of the building, or with the installation of the services he owns (electricity, water, gas, etc.). --EneaSuper (talk) 08:33, 25 March 2018 (UTC).
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Cbbaze (talk) 21:13, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. contractor is a temporary employee, builder should be used --Ndm (talk) 21:46, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. in my understanding of the language, a contractor is someone who provides a service. it could be the roofing contractor or the person who put in the lights, or the person who designed a database. the tag "contractor" is too generic. --Woodpeck (talk) 10:04, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. If we give a more specific meaning ("main building contractor") to a generic term ("contractor") this will set us up for problems in the future... The tag should be self-explanatory. --Csmale (talk) 10:24, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. I also oppose this proposal because the name is not sufficiently explicit / unambigous. Also, the concept for this tag stems from a certain (limited) idea how things can be built or are built in a certain context (one single contractor with either a lot of capabilities or sub-contractors), but there are infinite possibilities how to organize (and possibly divide into smaller pieces) big construction work (usually based on contracts taylored for the scope / project).--Dieterdreist (talk) 19:21, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. Because that's no geoinformation --14:41, 26 March 2018 (UTC)