[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

marc marc marc_marc_irc at hotmail.com
Sun Apr 21 23:49:40 UTC 2019

Le 22.04.19 à 00:39, Paul Allen a écrit :
> On Sun, 21 Apr 2019 at 22:56, marc marc wrote:
>     however I wonder if it's useful to promote changing_table:height
>     is there really any use for this tag ?
> A parent in a wheelchair might find that useful information,  

if the goal is to talk about accessibility, then use the wheelchair tag.
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. the entrance of the poi must be 
accessible, at least one path need to be accessible from the entrance to 
the changing table (including door and corridor). and if the height of 
the table then fits, a lot of tilting changing table are inaccessible 
because the lock is often too high even if the table height is very low. 
that's why I think promoting changing_table:height is a bad idea,
the contributor thinks he has entered useful information but it's not.
let's keep it simple, if one day someone see an accessible changing 
table, add the tag wheelchair=yes
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

>     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
> Description is a standard tag applicable

I know the tag description, thanks :)
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 ?
because if it is to inform the existence of a tag, we can edit
the whole wiki to say that the description tag exists,
which would increase the background noise without any added value.

>     I also ask where a changing_table:access=private or =no may be usefull
>     I think the reasoning used for toilets should also apply to equipment
>     such as a changing_table: if it is totally private, such as the
>     changing
>     table in your home bathroom, it is not necessary to add in osm.
> Some people may feel uncomfortable changing their baby in public view.  

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.

>     changing_table:location=dedicated_room
>     if the purpose is to change the key diaper=room to diaper=yes +
>     location=dedicated_room I think this value is an too precise
>     assumption

> If you never encountered a changing table in a dedicated room  
> then don't map it as such.

that's not what I said.
what I'm saying is : diaper=room doesn't have the same meaning
as changing_table:location=dedicated_room
if the proposal wants to change one by the other, that's not true.
so at least changing_table:location=room is needed to be able to
convert existing information without making any erroneous assumption.
Of course, i didn't disagree to use dedicated_room when it's
a dedicated_room :)


More information about the Tagging mailing list