There are 200 building=nursing_home so far which is not much. There must be thousands of nursing homes in Europe alone and many of them are built for the purpose which would qualify these buildings for a dedicated tag imo. There are some 30 of those in the closer surrounding, and most of them are mapped as building=yes, building=apartments or building=residential.
If building=nursing_home is generally accepted we should have a wiki page for it (no problem to create one). Or is there a better building tag for these kind of buildings?
A nursing home usually has a lot of room which are not used for accomodation. Reception, admin, kitchen, common rooms and the like. I’d say the style is closer to a hotel building than an apartment building.
You describing “inner” differences, though AFAIK building=* is describing how a building looks like from the outside. Things you describe would be covered by social_facility=nursing_home.
Is that so? Then how would you differentiate a building=kindergarten from a building=school, a building=hotel from a building=apartments, a building=university from a building=commercial or a building=civic from all of these? In many cases you cannot distinguish these buildings from the outside so apparently the use case makes a difference.
The wiki says
The most basic use is building=yes, but the value may be used to classify the (architectural) type of building.
The architecture of a building comprises the exterior as well as the interior structure/design. If we would simply go for the exterior style we could probably deprecate half of our building values cause they cannot be distinguished clearly from each other …
And some apartment buildings look like houses and vice versa . Similarly garage, shed and farm_auxillary. Industrial and warehouse, etc. It’s not an unreasonable suggestion.
Where it might get complicated would where the nursing home is co-located with a hospital or clinic, sheltered housing, etc.
How much different from co-living with many communal facilities though? Does that need a different building= ? Serviced apartment can have facilities comparable to hotels, although many are built as =hotel already. And to a less extent, apartment complexes/estates with clubhouses, gated and well-staffed.
Is this building= only for the same social_facility= ? There are =group_home , =hospice , and =assisted_living , which would all need its own building= ? Then there are different =shelter with their own usual layouts. Not scalable to justify immediately.
We do have a lot of documented building=* tags for buildings built for a certain purpose, although one may not be able to distinguish one from another. I listed a few examples above.
For buildings, planned and constructed as nursing homes, there is an undocumented tag building=nursing_home so far. I did not invent it, I am just asking if it makes sense to document this tag or if there is another, better solution for such buildings, which are neither apartmens nor hotels.
If you have a clear suggestion how to tag such nursing home buildings, just le me know.
It would be helpful to have a specific building tag for real nursing homes (dementia, vegetative state, age-related frailty) to distinguish them from hospitals or purely residential retirement communities. For the latter, I consider building=dormitory (even if the residents are not students or monks) to be a good solution, since these are private, individual living spaces with basic support (meals, community) and there is usually a reception/concierge desk along with a janitorial service.
Ich habe generell so meine Probleme mit building=*
Hier um die Ecke gibt es ein Apartmenthaus fĂĽr Studenten.
So etwas ist eigentlich building=dormitory. Dummerweise kenne ich die Ecke genau und weiß, daß das Gebäude kürzlich runderneuert wurde (und nicht abgerissen und neu gebaut).
Gebaut wurde es in den 70ern und lange Zeit stand da “Rhein-Main-Rechenzentrum” dran.
Was taggen wir nun: den building-type oder die Nutzung?
Im diskutierten Fall würde ich den Gebäudetyp eher unspezifisch halten und das Pflegeheim als POI eintragen.
I generally have some issues with building=*.
There’s a student apartment building right around the corner.
Something like that should be tagged as building=dormitory. Unfortunately, I know the area well and I know that the building was recently renovated (not torn down and rebuilt).
It was built in the 70s, and for a long time it was labeled “Rhein-Main-Rechenzentrum.”
So what do we tag: the building type or the current use?
In the case discussed, I’d keep the building type fairly unspecific and enter the nursing home as a POI.
In this case it would be building=commercial + building:use=dormitory unless the building has been redesigned and the whole interior structure has changed. Described in the english wiki page for buildings (which is different from the german one once again):
The most basic use is building=yes, but the value may be used to classify the (architectural) type of building. Note that it may be not the same as the building’s current use (tagged using building:use=*). For example, a hospital building that is abandoned or repurposed to be a marketplace is still a building=hospital, and to mark active hospitals amenity=hospital is used.
In other words: The purpose a building has been erected for goes into the building=* tag (which should not change over the lifetime of the building unless completely redesigned) and the kind of business or organization operating it goes into amenity=* which can change regularly.
Schon wieder so ein netter kleiner Unterschied zwischen den beiden Wiki-Versionen.
Spricht etwas dagegen, wenn ich den Abschnitt unten ins Wiki einfĂĽge?
(Habe so etwas noch nie gemacht) oder muĂź sollte man sich vorher die Wiki-Seite noch genauer auf weitere Unterschiede ansehen und das (wo?) ausdiskutieren?
Die einfachste Anwendungsmöglichkeit ist „building=yes“, doch der Wert kann auch genutzt werden, um den (architektonischen) Gebäudetyps genauer anzugeben.
Zu beachten ist, daß das nicht unbedingt mit der aktuellen Nutzung des Gebäudes übereinstimmen muss (die über „building:use=*“ gekennzeichnet wird).
So gilt beispielsweise ein Krankenhausgebäude, das aufgegeben oder zu einem Wohnhaus umfunktioniert wurde, weiterhin als „building=hospital“,
während für aktive Krankenhäuser „amenity=hospital“ verwendet wird.
Ich wĂĽrde den Abschnitt nicht unten einfĂĽgen, sondern oben, da wo er auch in der englischen Version steht.
Beides ist möglich - nur diese Passage ergänzen oder die gesamte Seite mal überprüfen, ob es da noch mehr deutliche Abweichungen gibt. Du kannst den Text auch glätten, damit sich die Übersetzung nicht so gestelzt anhört. Ich habe es schon auf meiner ToDo Liste für heute abend stehen, aber es spricht überhaupt nichts dagegen, dass Du es einfach mal probierst.
hab’ da mal ein paar Zeilen im Wiki zugefügt. Wär aber dennoch angebracht, wenn jemand mit Ahnung nochmal über die Seite drübergeht. :-)
Und zurĂĽck zum Ursprungsthema:
Ich wĂĽrde nicht noch mehr Werte fĂĽr building einfĂĽhren. Ob das nun ein Hotel oder ein Pflegeheim ist, das sieht man von auĂźen nicht so richtig (es sei denn es steht dran..).
Mit amenity=* lassen sich solche Feinheiten viel besser ausdrucken
And back to thread-theme
There is no need for another key for building.
From the outside, you can’t really tell its a hotel or a nursing_home (unless it says so on the building…)
amenity=* fits much better for such details.
Personally I have questions on the status of =dormitory for students as well. Is it for bunk beds only? If it’s all “private en suite” flats (some “halls”/accommodations are), it’s similar to co-living, and thus comparable to =apartments ? In between, there are many levels of privacy / sharing / communality. So this building= doesn’t satisfactorily characterize its interior architecture either.
Then there are some quarters for staffs in various industries that are exactly the same as =apartments
This applies for lots of building=* tags, some have already been listed above as examples. As one can easily recognize when looking at the existing building=* tags, the primary criterion is the purpose for which a building has been constructed, not what it’s exterior looks like.
amenity=* does not describe the building but the kind of business or organization operating it.
Af course it is in use - and if not because of ATYW - somebody would invent it tomorrow.
A hotel is a buildung with a reception and a great entrancehall.
It’s not an appartment-bulding 'case the rooms usually don’t have their own kitchen.
Many or all rooms are barrier-free. There is a breakfast-lounge and often a kind of restaurant/cafe/bar where the inhabitants and their guests can get something to eat and drink.
There are a lot rooms for social gatherings/conferences. There are rooms for wellnes/medical treatment.
lots of staff.
Often these buildings have something like subtenants: a hairdresser or a bakery.
everything above is also true for a nursing_home
When writing a wiki-page about “building=nursing_home”, it is nearly impossible to differentiate. Users should be encouraged to think twice about using it.
The more high-level/expensive nursing_homes have a tendency to call themselve a residence- There IS a reason for this…
It is very simple to differentiate. When a building has been constructed as a nursing home, it qualifies for building=nursing_home.
When one has been constructed as a hotel, it qualifies for building=hotel. I have both cases in the surrounding here and I do not see any reason why I should tag both of them as hotel or apartments when I am very much aware of the difference.
Of course I also could tag both of them as building=yes, but we could do that for all the 695 million buildings mapped so far. We don’t do that. So if we accept building=hotel or building=dormitory and the like, why should we exclude building=nursing_home? I have not seen a plausible argument yet, why we should.
I would rather see all those as the same building type, since I don’t see much of a difference. I could see a slight difference between an apartment building (with kind of only the staircase as common area) and all the others with common areas. Maybe building=serviced_apartment might be a good term. But still also normal apartment buildings come with common areas like the parking garage, washing room, bicycle storage,…
You haven’t mentioned anything how you would tell them OTG apart. What you mentioned earlier is nothing specific for nursing homes.
