[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Barbershop

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Wed Mar 3 11:08:06 UTC 2021

Am Mi., 3. März 2021 um 11:43 Uhr schrieb Bert -Araali- Van Opstal <
bert.araali.afritastic at gmail.com>:

> I pointed at it in the first sentence.  That was clear. I tried to explain
> that because they are split across two values it is very hard if not
> impossible to tag a hairdresser which offers both, as it is in many cases,
> not just in Africa. It invites to invent all kinds of constructions which
> are considered as not good practice.

from my understanding, if the shop offers only/mostly hairdresser service
(and selling hair products), it would be a hairdresser, if they do nails
too, or other beauty related services, it would be shop=beauty, although I
admit, the current definition says it is for "a non-hairdresser beauty
shop" which leaves us with a gap for beauty salons which also do
hairdresser work.

> Salon is a general and common term in English, and it covers exactly all
> the establishments that provide "beauty" related services, including
> barber_shop, specialised hairdresser etc... . Actually it is such a common
> term that it is adopted in many cultures and often used by the owners of
> these establishments to name then: in the UK but also in the US there are
> many Nail Salons, Hair Salons, in Dutch speaking countries "salon" is also
> used to name many of them.

there's a difference in "nail salon", "hair salon" or "tanning salon" (also
has already its tag: leisure=tanning_salon, even 2: shop=beauty with
beauty=tanning, and of course a long tail with shop=solarium), which is not
implied by amenity=salon. The term has other connotations as well, e.g.
salon de thé, a literary salon, etc.

> I agree, many local variants exist as providing in secondary provisions,
> yet the main and primary purpose of all is to provide beauty services. If
> we would have a separate amenity tag it allows to tag these in most cases
> on one single node, with one top level key / value. Secondary activities
> can be easily added with additional tags.
> I am clearly against creating all kinds of separate "local variant" values
> in top-level keys.  OSM and the tagging guidelines should cover the whole
> globe and all cultures, especially when a well known term like "salon"
> exists. Actually the term hairdresser is already a more "localised" tag.

yes and no. When things are sufficiently similar, we should use the same
tags, but if they are significantly different, we should not try to squeeze
the cubes into the round holes.

> Yet, their are also many now tagged shop=beauty that offer some kind of
> bathing as part of the service they provide.  It is the same issue.  Do you
> go to a shop for bathing ? Neither do I go to a shop to have a hair cut.
> They are not shops in the strict sense.

there's some overlap in our tags ;-) The shop definition says it is for
places selling goods and services, so it is a shop in the strict osm sense.
We do use different tags for services, some are in shop, some are in office
and some are in craft, and some in amenity. car repair is a shop in OSM,
car wash an amenity. I did not make this up, we have to live with it, or
undertake a significant, years long effort to restructure this. We still
are lacking many tags for shops and services, if we manage to sort out what
we would like to have, we could start classifying new tags according to
this logic, and when it becomes established, we might be able to do some
larger scale retagging for existing tags, but I am not holding my breath.

>> Sometimes there are specialized salons dealing with specialized
>> treatments such as hair salons and nail salons.
> we have a specialized tag also for nail salons, it is under shop=beauty
> beauty=nails. Btw., summarizing manicure and pedicure, while I guess these
> are distinct services (who offers pedicure might not offer manicure and
> vice versa) and maybe should be reconsidered.
> True, shop=beauty, and that they are "specialised" values in a top level
> key creates all kind of problems and creativity because we can't combine
> them on a single node without inventing all kind of new "specialised"
> top-level values.

for practical purposes which go beyond statistics or drawing a generic
icon, we actually do need specialised descriptions, because if you want to
get a haircut you won't be satisfied with finding a place that does nails.

Change is difficult, I know, and I would not deprecate shop=hairdresser or
> shop=beauty, but redefine them as shops where you buy hairdresser
> accessories or beauty products and accessories.

help. Please not. Never do this. It would break everything. If you want to
restructure the system, I would strongly advise to use new tags. When you
redefine existing tags for something different, it leads to complete chaos.

If you are serious, set up a proposal and we can discuss the implications
in more detail.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210303/1ac3a7ae/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list