[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - nudism:designated
tamasrell at gmail.com
Mon Mar 1 10:28:16 UTC 2021
> the proposed tag is nudism=designated, and the definition is nudism is
> possible but one is not obligated (it wouldn't be strange if you wore a
> bathing suit, or some people will be naked, and others won't, right?). IMHO
> this would be a less strict value than nudism=yes, where the wiki states
> "allowed and generally expected", and this would be strange, because
> typically, "designated" is stronger than "yes". This is also in line what
> the nudism page states: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:nudism
>> Other frequently used values:* designated* - intended for nudist use by
>> law or owner, something between "yes" and "obligatory"
> Maybe I got your proposal wrong, but if the intention is for "designated"
> to be looser than yes (generally expected), I believe a different name for
> the value woul be required.
In my understanding nudism:yes is less specific, it's simply a beach where
people take their clothes off, but the legal status is unknown.
Let's see a few examples:
- Is it designated by the (local) government and advertised by the tourist
board as a nude beach? -> :designated
- Is it within a resort and nudity is obligatory? -> :obligatory
- Is it just a beach where nudists usually go, not advertised,
they only know about it by word of mouth? -> :customary
- Is it a regular beach, but no one cares if you undress and sometimes
people do? -> :permissive (or :optional)
Nudism:yes can be the first three.
I really like your idea to change :permissive to :optional, it reminds me
of the term "clothing optional" and this is what I think :permissive means.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging