[Voting cancelled - RFC] police:branch & police:speciality

General talk Tagging general discussion
,
1

Voting has started for Proposal:Key:police:branch - OpenStreetMap Wiki and Proposal:Key:police:speciality - OpenStreetMap Wiki

2

What exactly do you want us to vote on?

The page for police:speciality is essentially empty. No suggestions for values, no examples.

The page for police:branch should have clear examples from at least a few countries. I also don’t see how regional_police relates to state police forces. States are not regions.

1 Like
3

There’s a list of example values. This tag is flexible enough that I don’t think there’s a need to introduce the value list through a proposal process. The values should just be documented as mappers need them.

As always, a tag is just a word that we use in lieu of a random code, but we can define what we means with the tag in the wiki. In this case, “an admin level between the nation and the municipality”. In this definition, a state is very much a region.

I had hoped more countries would have come up during the discussion phase, but the request didn’t come up there. However all the tagging models listed on the amenity=police page are a good fit. In the discussions a few examples did come up, with the German model being so complex as to not fit at all (which isn’t a problem in itself, as the model does not expect to fit the whole world).

Would it be helpful to add such a list here (as I’m not allowed to edit the proposal anymore)? Any countries in particular you’d like to see checked against it?

4

You can cancel the voting, return the proposal to RFC, & keep talking about it.

I think the whole thing may have stalled as, in this case, one size doesn’t fit all!

I can also see the advantages of the ideas, but I think that Police may be even more complicated than military service?

5

=regional is common OSM terminology, while the specific classification of states could be further added in eg admin_level= + admin_title= adapted somehow. The latter still has the problem of English classification vs native language word. But besides, the =*_police is repetitive.
Regardless of this, I would have voted no, as my fundamental question was still unsolved after 2 posts [RFC] police:branch & police:specialization - #2 by Kovoschiz

1 Like
6

אני בעד זה

1 Like
7

Aight, I’ll do that. Flesh it out with more countries and how they fit in it and make a table with the already-known speciality values

See I still don’t see why one size should fit all. I stated explicitly that the proposal for the branches is meant to fit just the places which follow this kind of structure. But I guess it is up to me to prove many places actually do fit.

1 Like
8

Essentially we already have a scheme that can cope with country specific peculiarities - the police:FR that is in use in France plus very few uses in several other countries. All is needed is a proper documentation of all the branches in each country and we’re done.

1 Like
9

Syntax-wise, it’s not proper. police= are facilities. police:*= would be country-specific features, eg police:JP= =koban / =police_box in Japan. There would also be =keibu_koban (“chief inspector police box”) in between. It has already gotten into police:type= , which can further be related to the inconvenient naming of =police vs police= for the lack of an attribute for police stations.
police:FR=police looks silly too. 4 police:FR=police_nationale | Tags | OpenStreetMap Taginfo