[Tagging] Pets allowed

Mateusz Konieczny matkoniecz at tutanota.com
Fri Mar 8 08:13:56 UTC 2019


If it is import data (can you link its documentation page on the OSM wiki?)
then it certainly should not add blindly "dogs" unless it was defined this way
in source data.

10% wrong is completely unacceptable for imports.


Mar 7, 2019, 11:27 PM by cascafico at gmail.com:

> 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 <mailto:sophietheopossum at yandex.com>> > ha scritto:
>
>>
>> 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 LNER.
>>
>> On 3/7/19 12:17 PM, Paul Allen wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 7 Mar 2019 at 12:05, <>>> phil at trigpoint.me.uk <mailto: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/ <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 list>>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>  Tagging mailing list
>>  >> Tagging at openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging at openstreetmap.org>
>>  >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging>
>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20190308/d34b9ca6/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list