[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