[Tagging] Pets allowed

Cascafico Giovanni cascafico at gmail.com
Thu Mar 7 22:27:20 UTC 2019

Unfortunately dataset I'm manually importing has a boolean "pets" field.
I guess if go for "dogs" it will be 9/10 right, while a generic "pets"
99/100 (considering the alligator anomaly :-) The latter has less taginfo
popularity, but better fits source data.

Il gio 7 mar 2019, 14:09 seirra blake <sophietheopossum at yandex.com> ha

> while I can't see a problem with a tag for each pet, it may still make
> more sense to have a pets tag and just namespace species/related things
> under it similar to the access tag. use cases I can think of:
>    - pets=no | no matter what, no pets
>    - pets=yes | open to all or at least most pets other than specified
>    examples such as...
>    - pets:dogs=no | dogs that are pets are not allowed, a guide dog does
>    not necessarily count as a pet or at least, I don't think of one as being a
>    pet.
>    - pets:cats=1 | only one cat allowed
> this does still make it vague in the sense that if only one cat is
> allowed, is it per party or per person, but this probably could be made
> more specific with another tag namespaced under pets (my mind is blank, I
> haven't eaten yet. however this feels like the best approach to cover most
> situations). this may also be useful for things like water-bowls/treats for
> pets as mentioned elsewhere here; for example: my bank offers dog biscuits
> for dogs, the train station used to offer a water-bowl as well, but I
> haven't put much thought into seeing if it's there after the take over by
> On 3/7/19 12:17 PM, Paul Allen wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 12:05, <phil at trigpoint.me.uk> wrote:
>> Pets is probably a bit vague, many hotels will accept pet dogs, but are
>> less likely  to accept cats and extremely unlikely to my pet alligator (no
>> I don't really own one).
> Some holiday cottages accept dogs but place a limit on the number (only
> one; a maximum of two; etc.)
> Yes, some do accept cats, and there are many cat owners who would love to
> be able to take their
> cat on holiday with them.  So it would be nice if we had something a
> little more flexible than
> dog=yes/no.
> Obviously dogs=no will only apply to pets, registered assistance dogs are
>> covered by the law of the country, in the UK a hotel/pub/restaurant is not
>> allowed to refuse assistance dogs. I assume the same is true throughout the
>> EU.
> I believe that, in the UK, NO business can refuse assistance dogs (but I
> could be wrong).  It's also
> the case in the UK that non-assistance dogs are NOT legally prohibited
> from pubs and
> restaurants but only from food preparation areas: it's the owner's
> decision as to whether or not
> dogs are allowed where food is served and sold.  See
> https://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/our-resources/kennel-club-campaigns/be-dog-friendly/
> Many shops and a few restaurants in my town display a sign somewhere
> saying that dogs
> are allowed.
> --
> Paul
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing listTagging at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190307/8e483021/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list