Proposal:Education tag: Difference between revisions
→Voting: + |
|||
Line 159: | Line 159: | ||
{{vote|yes}} --[[User:G.molinario|G.molinario]] ([[User talk:G.molinario|talk]]) 22:54, 13 February 2025 (UTC) |
{{vote|yes}} --[[User:G.molinario|G.molinario]] ([[User talk:G.molinario|talk]]) 22:54, 13 February 2025 (UTC) |
||
{{vote|yes}} --[[User:Nw520|Nw520]] ([[User talk:Nw520|talk]]) 23:11, 13 February 2025 (UTC) |
{{vote|yes}} --[[User:Nw520|Nw520]] ([[User talk:Nw520|talk]]) 23:11, 13 February 2025 (UTC) |
||
{{vote|yes}} --[[User:Fizzie41|Fizzie41]] ([[User talk:Fizzie41|talk]]) 23:18, 13 February 2025 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:18, 13 February 2025
Key:education | |
---|---|
Proposal status: | Voting (under way) |
Proposed by: | quincylvania |
Tagging: | education=*
|
Applies to: | ![]() ![]() |
Definition: | An educational facility. |
Statistics: |
|
Draft started: | 2024-08-20 |
RFC start: | 2024-11-11 |
Vote start: | 2025-02-13 00:00:00 (UTC) |
Vote end: | 2025-02-26 23:59:59 (UTC) |
Proposal
education=*
shall be adopted as the recommended key for tagging all education features. Following the model of the healthcare=*
key, existing education tags such as amenity=school
shall not be deprecated and should remain in use alongside education=*
tags for the foreseeable future.
Rationale
education=*
tag, with over 5,000 uses as of 2024, is an alternate method of tagging schools, universities, and other educational facilities. However, amenity=*
tags are by far the standard way to tag these features (amenity=school
, amenity=university
, etc.). As a result, educational features in OSM share no common tags with each other that identify them categorically. This makes it overly difficult to query, filter, and render educational features. This issue is compounded when trying to account for the long tail of low-usage education tags, like amenity=sailing_school
and amenity=cooking_school
.
This same situation previously existed for healthcare features until OSM mappers and tools adopted the healthcare=*
tag to better categorize them. healthcare=*
tags typically live alongside their corresponding amenity=*
tags, allowing for a years-long period of transition where existing tools remain functional while the tag is gradually adopted. This method has proven successful, with over 800,000 healthcare=*
uses as of 2024.
In the long term, adopting a single education=*
key will encourage more accurate and detailed mapping of education features. Mappers who are unsure about the nature of an educational facility can use a tag like education=yes
instead of erroneously using amenity=school
. Mappers can easily invent new values under education=*
for niche feature types. In these cases, data consumers would not have to handle each case individually, since all these features would share the same key, education=*
.
Tagging
- Existing education tags (mostly under
amenity=*
) should be left in place. - Mappers should add an appropriate
education=*
tag to educational facilities. - The
education=*
value should match theamenity=*
value when they are used together. - An
education=*
matching anamenity=*
values takes on the exact same meaning. education=yes
may be used to tag an education facility of unknown properties, or to specify that a feature of a different type provides some sort of educational program.- Mappers are free to define new values under
education=*
to describe an educational facility when existing values are inadequate. education=yes
or customeducation=*
values should not be used on generic infrastructure.
Tag mappings
Existing tags with fewer than 100 uses are ignored.
Unaffected tags
Tag | Note |
---|---|
amenity=childcare
|
Childcare without an educational curriculum is considered outside the scope of this proposal. |
amenity=dojo
|
There is some debate over this tag and whether it maps directly to a martial arts training school, or is simply a place where one can practice martial arts. |
office=tutoring
|
This is a low-usage tag with a meaning that is not entirely clear. |
Comparison with past proposals
- Proposal:Education Reform (2013, abandoned) proposed tagging educational amenities as
amenity=educational_facility
+educational_facility=*
. - Proposal:Education 2.0 (2016, rejected) was a complex, top-down proposal for
education=*
plus a number of large number of new tags.- Some reviewers opposed the 2016 proposal as too sprawling or unrefined. In comparison, I've tried to keep my proposal targeted and simple.
- Others worried about having both
education=*
andamenity=*
tags for the same thing. However, this was before the proliferation of thehealthcare=*
tag provided a viable model.
- Proposal:Education Reform Alternative (2017, abandoned) proposed tagging educational amenities with
education=*
andeducation_for=*
.- This proposal was much more prescriptive than is my proposal.
- Proposal:Training (2022, rejected) proposed replacing specialty tags like
amenity=sailing_school
withamenity=training
+training=*
.- Some reviewers raised issue with the large number of tag deprecations. In contrast, my proposal does not deprecate any tags.
- Some reviewers thought the target features were too dissimilar to all share the same primarily tag
amenity=training
. My proposal instead maps all these tag values directly undereducation=*
without any change in meaning. - At least one reviewer suggested using
education=*
instead.
Features/Pages affected
There are a lot of education-related wiki pages in various languages that will need updating. On feature pages, existing documentation would be left alone while a note recommending concurrent tagging with education=*
would be added.
External discussions
Comments
Please comment on the discussion page.
Voting
- Log in to the wiki if you are not already logged in.
- Scroll back down and click "Edit source" next to the title "Voting". Copy and paste the appropriate code from this table on its own line at the bottom of the text area:
To get this output | you type | Description |
---|---|---|
{{vote|yes}} --~~~~
|
Feel free to also explain why you support the proposal! | |
{{vote|no}} reason --~~~~
|
Replace reason with your reason(s) for voting no. | |
{{vote|abstain}} comments --~~~~
|
If you don't want to vote yes or no but do have something to say. Replace comments with your comments. |
~~~~
automatically inserts your name and the current date.For more types of votes you can cast, see Template:Vote. See also how vote outcome is processed.
I approve this proposal. --Quincylvania (talk) 14:38, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
I approve this proposal. --GA Kevin (talk) 14:46, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
I approve this proposal. --darkonus (talk) 14:55, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
I approve this proposal. Seems like a reasonable step toward more cohesive tagging, while also being a non-breaking change for existing data users. --Willkmis (talk) 15:18, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
I approve this proposal. Better than the overuse of the amenity tag. Glassman (talk) 15:43, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. I do not see "overuse of the amenity tag" as being a thing or a problem. I am also dubious whether duplication of keys as is happening with
healthcare=*
is worth replicating Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 16:14, 13 February 2025 (UTC)I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. I don't think we should add one entry per type of sport, but rather a general
education=sport
and then addsport=*
. This would also be a nice replacement for martial arts schools that are not necessarily a dojo. --Nadjita (talk) 16:26, 13 February 2025 (UTC)I approve this proposal. —seav (talk) 17:43, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
I approve this proposal. I think this is a good initial step towards better tagging of education facilities. I was also in favor of earlier versions of this proposal that proposed to group training and sport schools under
education=training
and usingtraining=*
andsport=*
tags to further refine the type of training offered, and I hope to see that reintroduced in a later proposal. — Jake Low (talk) 19:01, 13 February 2025 (UTC)I approve this proposal. --ViriatoLusitano (talk | contribs) 19:04, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
I approve this proposal. --WalkerB (talk) 20:52, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
I approve this proposal. --G.molinario (talk) 22:54, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
I approve this proposal. --Nw520 (talk) 23:11, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
I approve this proposal. --Fizzie41 (talk) 23:18, 13 February 2025 (UTC)