Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

[Valor Naram]

I need to clarify the access=* key for my proposal to pleace this discussion.

changing_table:access=yes
The changing table is accessible to the public. This means you can change the nappy of your baby without being a customer. This happens rarely.

changing_table:access=no
The changing table isn't also accessible for the customers. We should leave this value anyway because parents don't have any doubt of asking. It applies also for rooms for which you need a key.

changing_table:access=customers
The changing table is only accessible for customers. This is a value that applies to most POIs.

changing_table:access=permissive
The use of the changing table is accessible to the public but access can be revoked at any time for just one or few individuals while some are allowed.

In fact: We can delete this subkey because the most changing tables in POIs are for customers only and permission of using it by others may be given out on a individual basic.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table
From: Paul Allen
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"
CC:

On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 at 00:50, marc marc <marc_marc_...@hotmail.com> wrote:

if the goal is to talk about accessibility, then use the wheelchair tag.

That just says if you can get a wheelchair into the toilet.

but if by measuring the height of the table, you think you have done
what it's need to inform accessibility, you are wrong, this detail is
almost anecdotal in accessibility.

No more anecdotal than anything else anybody maps.

 

for all the others, no need to have a meter in your pocket,
it's wheelchair=no, no need to fill heigh=1 or 1.05 or .95 except for 3D

And how about those with achondroplasia?

To be honest, I doubt many mappers would bother mapping the height and it's

probably not all that useful in most situations.  But the fact that somebody here

suggested it means it is likely that somebody will decide to map the height, in which

case let's decide how to do it now.

>     same thing for the description key, I can't imagine when it's useful to
>     describe the table with words so I find it not very useful to promote it

Security through obscurity doesn't work.  As for promoting it or not, it depends very much on

what editors offer in their presets.

the question is "can we expect to have changing tables on a regular

basis that are different from what we can expect with other tags,
which would justify encouraging people to put a description ?

Actually, no.  It's can we expect it on an irregular basis.  Because description is only rarely

necessary for anything.

access=* don't said anything about public view.
changing tables in a private area does not mean that your child
is protected from a public view (I know a changing table in
the private part of the maternity just in front of a windows
with a public corridor)
a changing table in a public toilet can be in a room that
is respectful of privacy.
if you want to inform this kind of info, it's probably better
to make another proposal for another key in stead of promoting
to hijack the access key to talk about public view when using
the feature.

I already suggested that in private mail  to Valor for other reasons.  The developers of

some editors don't like re-using keys with a subset of values and remove such usage from

presets.  If offering the full list of values doesn't make sense they either have to hard-code the

exceptions or refuse to implement it in a preset, and these days it's usually refusal.  And, as

you've pointed out, not only does the syntax differ (only a subset of values make sense) so does

the semantics.  So changing_table:access would be better.

--

Paul

_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging