[Tagging] horse rental

[Hufkratzer]

3 months ago on the wiki page for tag leisure=horse_riding someone 
recommended to use the tags horse:rental=yes and horse:type=* to 
indicate that one can rent a horse there. At the time of this addition 
these tags were not used, meanwhile horse:rental=yes is used once and 
horse:type twice,

I think these numbers do not justify an explanation on a main wiki page, 
the new tags may be proposed on a proposal page. But I think 
horse:rental=yes is not well suited for horses. The key "horse:rental" 
is linked to tag shop=rental and the description for this is "A shop 
that rents different kinds of vehicles or (sport) equipment." But horses 
are neither vehicles (see wiki page for  key access) nor (sport) 
equipment. They are also normally not sold or rented in shops. Horses 
are also not mentioned on the wiki page for shop=rental anywhere.

I think a better alternative would be to use amenity=horse_rental, this 
is currently used 5 times, this would be analogous to 
amenity=car_rental, amenity=bicycle_rental and amenity=boat_rental. If 
the horse rental is only a secondary activity it may be tagged 
horse_rental=yes (with underline, currently used once) instead of 
horse:rental=yes (with colon), analogously to what is written on the 
wiki pages for amenity=animal_boarding and amenity=animal_breeding, for 
example.

Please also compare the discussion
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Riding#Place_to_rent_donkey_?

For the tag horse:type it is unclear if it is for all horses that are 
accommodated on the facility or just for the horses that are for rent. 
It may also be confused with an access tag.

The additions of the new tags on the wiki pages for leisure=horse_riding 
and on the feature page for Riding were marked as "small" changes. I 
think these additions and also the pages Key:horse:rental and 
Key:horse:type (redirects) should be removed..Do you agree?
Do you agree that a proposal for amenity=horse_rental would make more sense?