Talk:Key:museum type

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Not very clear

Aren't the documented values more about the operator type than about the museum? There are other values that deal with a different kind of "museum type" in taginfo, e.g. Historical␣Personalities, Natural␣Sciences␣-␣Zoology, Science␣and␣Technology, etc. While I welcome the idea to subtype museums, I think there should be several properties with a well defined scope. --Dieterdreist (talk) 10:30, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

It seems to me this tag could be showing the level of collection (eg "national museum", "state museum", "municipal museum", "institution museum", "association museum","private museum"), similar to libraries, instead of operator:type=*. Ownership and operator type can change hands. As in, a museum exhibiting a personal collection could be run a public organization, or a government directly. (not sure about the aspects of ownership, entrusting, etc) Just that they are often causative. -- Kovposch (talk) 13:09, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
Indeed, this seems reasonable. Let's improve the documentation to make it clear. --Dieterdreist (talk) 12:46, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

This key is very useful to highlight the type of administration of the museum, not 'the type of museum' or 'the operator'. Please see this case: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/54041468

  1. museum:art
  2. museum_type:national
  3. operator:Dirección Nacional de Museos

You can also see our GLAM project: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Argentina/Cultura/GLAM/Museos I'm very sorry that ID considers it an obsolete tag best --Martingggg (talk) 22:50, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Since when does iD consider it "obsolete"? Anyway, you shouldn't worry too much about that. The thing is, it is useful to "highlight the" specific property "of administration of the museum". It is confusing "to highlight the type of administration of the museum", when the administration can have many "type" category. Hence, the problem is this key is not "very useful to highlight the type of administration of the museum". A more specific key should be used. While operator:type=* may be considered an improvement within the status quo (it is an ambigous de facto *:type=* key), it fails to distinguish the musuem operator and source of collection. A musuem holding a national or state level collection can be operated non-governmentally. On the contrary, a personal collection can be operated by the national government. This is what I wanted to point out. Find a more specific key to be clear. -- Kovposch (talk) 12:06, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Forgot to mention there's also the "type" of the subject, aside from level of collection. I don't know Spanish, so I need more time to study your museums if you want an locally relevant example. Interntionally, one well-known example behind my motivation is US Presidential library. It's a subject of the national government, exhibits "usually" collected nation-wide (possible exceptions are historic sites, family materials, etc), that's has many "type"s of operators. Again, these 3 elements often coincident, but this result doesn't dictate the appropriateness of our methods. -- Kovposch (talk) 12:33, 11 August 2020 (UTC)