תיוג נכון של מקוואות

[hatul]

@NeatNit

• amenity=ritual_bath

מבחינתי אפשר גם amenity=ritual_bath+ritual_bath:type=mikveh

אבל חשוב שתופיע המילה מקווה, כי אחרת זה ממש לא ברור.

אגב, בהחלט קיים גם תיוג building=synagogue וגם building=church בנוסף אל amenity=place_of_worship

[NeatNit]

@hatul

אגב, בהחלט קיים גם תיוג building=synagogue וגם building=church בנוסף אל amenity=place_of_worship

התיוג של building מתאר תכונות אדריכליות של המבנה, ולא את השימוש שלו. כלומר, זה אומר שהמבנה נבנה במקור בתור כנסייה/בית כנסת, אפילו אם הוא כבר לא משתמש למטרה זו. זה כתוב במפורש בערך שקישרת, בפסקה הראשונה: Tag:building=church - OpenStreetMap Wiki . באופן דומה, קיימים בתי כנסת שלא במבנה שנבנה במקור להיות בית כנסת.

[tantanWS]

I think adding also a tag that specifies if there is also a מקוה כלים in addition to the mikveh is important

[NeatNit]

בתור אדם מאוד לא דתי שמעולם לא היה במקווה, אני אשמח להסבר.

[אמר_רבא]

טבילת כלים – המכלול

[NeatNit]

אז אפשר להוסיף תגית בסגנון vessel=yes למקווה שמתאים לטבילת כלים. כלומר:

מקווה לטבילת גוף: amenity=ritual_bath + religion=jewish + (אופציונלי) body=yes

מקווה לטבילת כלים בלבד: amenity=ritual_bath + religion=jewish + body=no + vessel=yes

במילים אחרות, התיוג הבסיסי למקווה יעיד על ערכי ברירת מחדל לגבי אם ניתן לטבול גוף או כלים, כמו OSM tags for routing/Access restrictions - OpenStreetMap Wiki, ותיוג נוסף יוכל לשנות את הערכים האלה.

@hatul

אבל חשוב שתופיע המילה מקווה, כי אחרת זה ממש לא ברור.

אני לא בטוח שאני מסכים, המילה “מקווה” צריכה להופיע בעורך (iD, JOSM, Vespucci, …) אבל אין שום סיבה שהיא תופיע בנתונים של OSM.

(עריכה): למשל עבור בית כנסת, אתה בוחר “בית כנסת” (synagogue)

אבל בתיוג המילה synagogue לא מופיעה:

אז באופן דומה iD יאפשר לך לבחור “מקווה” (mikveh) אבל התיוג יכול להיות בלי המילה.

[Ori_Levenglick]

בנוסף יש בוויקי

• mikveh:type=keilim for mikveh locations that can be sued for vessels
• mikveh:type=people

אבל מה לעשות אם מדובר במקווה לכלים וגם לאנשים? אולי

mikveh:type = keilim;people

[eliyahu_bowers_𐤀𐤋𐤉𐤄𐤅_𐤁𐤅𐤅𐤓𐤎]

If we are using amenity=mikveh I think that language makes sense, but if we are trying to use the more general tagging of amenity=ritual_bath then ritual_bath:type=objects, ritual_bath:type=people would make more sense.

---

I have done a search on similar structures used by other groups. There are structures in Christianity Lavabo, Baptismal_font, Cantharus, in Buddism Tsukubai, but these are structures that would not fall under the terminology “ritual bath” in the plain meaning of the term as they relate to washing a part of ones body (hands, feet) and not immersion. There are of course also the natural structures that contain water suitable for washing according to many groups but the status of those can be determined by other tags. In the case of Islam there is Ghusl which is most commonly done by hand. There are structures like Hammams but the purpose they served for ritual purification seems to be ancillary. The more common structures are Shadirvans but these are more fountains along the lines of Cantharus.

All in all it seems to me that if we go for the expanded tagging scheme we should choose a name other than ritual_bath, maybe something more along the lines of ablution. Otherwise my vote would be with the more specific mikveh tag.

[SafwatHalaby]

Whether it’s ritual_bath or some other term, I strongly agree with @NeatNit here on two points:

1. That using a general tag is a lot more idiomatic, as it allows non-specialized consumers (renderers, apps, etc) to detect the general feature. Consider an app that has a generic icon for ritual baths but no specific icon for Mikvehs. Specialization can be done in an additional tag and more fine-grained consumers can use that. This is why I voted amenity=ritual_bath+religion=jewish.
2. That the mapping-convenient wording “Mikveh” that can be an editor-level thing just like many other convenient wordings.

@NeatNit

• We don’t have amenity=church, instead we have amenity=place_of_worship+religion=christian
• We don’t have amenity=synagogue, instead we have amenity=place_of_worship+religion=jewish
• We don’t have amenity=pizzeria, instead we have amenity=restaurant+cuisine=pizza (or amenity=fast_food+cuisine=pizza, let’s not get into that though)

[eliyahu_bowers_𐤀𐤋𐤉𐤄𐤅_𐤁𐤅𐤅𐤓𐤎]

So then I would recommend we use language of washing rather than bathing so more places could be logically included. Although I agree with the sentiment of using general tagging it doesn’t make sense to use a general tag if the only thing it could be logically used to tag is a mikveh. There are tags as specific as this that have been approved : kneipp_water_cure. We also have amenity=ice_cream used more than cuisine=ice_cream.

But if there is agreement (we should do an actual poll) that more general tagging should be used. I recommend amenity=ablution or if not enough people are expected to know that word (and that is a good reason to not use it as a tag) amenity=ritual_washing.

[NeatNit]

@eliyahu_bowers_𐤀𐤋𐤉𐤄𐤅_𐤁𐤅𐤅𐤓𐤎

But if there is agreement (we should do an actual poll) that more general tagging should be used. I recommend amenity=ablution or if not enough people are expected to know that word (and that is a good reason to not use it as a tag) amenity=ritual_washing.

Personally, I didn’t know this word before today. It’s a perfect fit, but as you said it’s an obscure word.

To me, ritual_washing sounds about as good as ritual_bath, so I’m good with that. I feel like a tag like this should be a noun, but it’s not a big deal.

I’d like to get some input from the international OSM community, perhaps those with more experience standardizing tags..? Anyone know who to ask?

[hatul]

אני אשמח שנחליט, לא חשוב בדיוק מה אבל שאפשר יהיה להתחיל לעבוד.

בסוף ברגע שהכול מתויג יהיה גם קל להחליף בעתיד.

[eliyahu_bowers_𐤀𐤋𐤉𐤄𐤅_𐤁𐤅𐤅𐤓𐤎]

@NeatNit

Anyone know who to ask?

I don’t think there is anyone particular to ask we should make a [proposal]( Proposal - OpenStreetMap Wiki ) like the one for [ritual_bath]( Tag:amenity=ritual_bath - OpenStreetMap Wiki ) and then try and spread it around to see what people think about it then start tagging.

@hatul

I’d love for us to decide, it doesn’t matter exactly what but that it will be possible to start working.

Even if we haven’t made an approved tag yet decided yet I think it is completely reasonable to start tagging untagged objects with the new proposal.

[eliyahu_bowers_𐤀𐤋𐤉𐤄𐤅_𐤁𐤅𐤅𐤓𐤎]

I made a proposal : Proposal:Ablution - OpenStreetMap Wiki . I have gone with ablution for reasons described here and on the proposal.

I think if would be best If we got consensus here first before sending it off to the wider community. If there is anything to add or to change please comment.