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

Andrew Chadwick (lists) a.t.chadwick+lists at gmail.com
Wed Jul 24 13:38:41 UTC 2013


On 15/07/13 07:52, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:
> Open for voting is
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:amenity%3Dtoilets
> Which includes toilets:position and toilets:disposal, to allow tagging
> of squat facilities
> and pitlatrines.

Capacity tagging needs to be added.  This might make toilets:position
redundant.


We should be able to express how many stalls and urinals there are, to
help solve the problem of finding a toilet which is likely to be vacant
right now.

Let's use a riff on the way the parking schemata do it, tailored for
toilets by 'position', or better by a sort of stall type/user or stall
plumbing type thing:

  capacity={yes|<count>}        ;; total capacity for all users
  capacity:<type>={yes|no|<count>}  ;; capacity for specific usage

where <count> is a cardinal number, {0, 1, 2, ...}, and <type> is a
stall type {disabled, seated, squat, urinal, ...}.  Expressing it in an
open-ended way allows capacities for disabled users to be expressed
similarly to the parking schemata.  It even helps hide a minor
ick-factor by making it not purely about how one excretes, and that
could help with uptake of the tag[1].

Speaking of cultural mores that make mapping trickier, we may wish to
add "limited" as a possible <count>, for when queues are known to form
at busy times for people of a different toilet-door-gender to one's own.

This would seem to fully replace the proposed toilets:position key, and
it's  simpler and more versatile.  What do you think?


[1] No, seriously.  Simple resistance to talking about these things even
affects healthcare provision and research, just ask Mary Roach.  Assume
a non-zero number of OSM volunteers will be shrinking violets...

-- 
Andrew Chadwick



More information about the Tagging mailing list