[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting Open - toilets, toilets:disposal, pitlatrine

Andrew Chadwick (lists) a.t.chadwick+lists at gmail.com
Wed Jul 24 12:43:28 UTC 2013

On 20/07/13 00:29, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> Something could be both  inquiry and customer.  Is there a better way?

"Inquiry" is expressed as "you must inquire to receive a key or code for
the toilet". This is a combination of concerns, and it should be
expressed more atomically.

As described in the proposal, "inquiry" is partly about practical
locking mechanisms so a better way which factors out those concerns is

  locked={yes|<mechanism>}    [1] (or some other tag)

This is better because access=private already carries the "you must
inquire" meaning. As the Key:access page states, access=private means
"only with permission of the owner on an individual basis".  And how
does one acquire permission?  One inquires.

For your example, one needn't inquire as to whether one may use the
toilets if one is a customer.  Merely after a code, for example.  So a
better way would be to use

  locked=code        [1] (or some other tag)

I object to muddling the access=* key with yet more values having the
same meaning as existing ones, especially without discussion on the
access tagging page.  access=* describes legal access, and should have
nothing to do with practical access (except for barriers, sigh).  In
short: if you need to ask before each use, then it's an existing
restrictive access value, either "customers", or more probably "private".

[1] Taginfo: http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/locked#values

Andrew Chadwick

More information about the Tagging mailing list