[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Baby changing table

bkil bkil.hu+Aq at gmail.com
Mon Apr 22 12:50:39 UTC 2019

To aid those with achondroplasia, I think it would also be useful to
indicate whether adjustable_height is a feature of the table, though I
guess they are already prepared to use the floor anyway.

On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 2:22 PM Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 at 00:50, marc marc <marc_marc_irc at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> if the goal is to talk about accessibility, then use the wheelchair tag.
> That just says if you can get a wheelchair into the toilet.
> 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.
> No more anecdotal than anything else anybody maps.
>> 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
> And how about those with achondroplasia?
> To be honest, I doubt many mappers would bother mapping the height and it's
> probably not all that useful in most situations.  But the fact that
> somebody here
> suggested it means it is likely that somebody will decide to map the
> height, in which
> case let's decide how to do it now.
> >     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
> Security through obscurity doesn't work.  As for promoting it or not, it
> depends very much on
> what editors offer in their presets.
> 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 ?
> Actually, no.  It's can we expect it on an irregular basis.  Because
> description is only rarely
> necessary for anything.
> 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.
> I already suggested that in private mail  to Valor for other reasons.  The
> developers of
> some editors don't like re-using keys with a subset of values and remove
> such usage from
> presets.  If offering the full list of values doesn't make sense they
> either have to hard-code the
> exceptions or refuse to implement it in a preset, and these days it's
> usually refusal.  And, as
> you've pointed out, not only does the syntax differ (only a subset of
> values make sense) so does
> the semantics.  So changing_table:access would be better.
> --
> Paul
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190422/2d5477a6/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list