[Tagging] Pets allowed

[seirra blake]

I never saw that in access before, but that actually makes a lot of 
sense. conditionals are somewhat underutilised where I live so I always 
forget about them, but that's a fair point

On 3/7/19 9:58 PM, Warin wrote:
> On 08/03/19 00:07, seirra blake wrote:
>>
>> 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
>>
>
> Presently they are tagged as per access tagging.
> motor_vehicle=yes/no
> horse=yes/no
> dog=yes/no
> ferret=yes/no
> parrot=yes/no
> etc
>
>> 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.
>>
>
> Where a quantity limit applies ? dog:1= yes @ per party ???
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190308/993775f9/attachment.html>