[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Barbershop

nathan case nathancase at outlook.com
Wed Mar 3 14:48:19 UTC 2021

To follow up on this, my suggestion tagging scheme for a barbers would be:

shop=hairdressers --- since it is well established
hairdressers=barbers  --- an additional descriptive tag that gives us a way to easily filter to barbers
male=yes  --- but ONLY if the barbers truly restricts access to men (which, as I say, would not be legally allowed in the UK but may be allowed in other countries).

The default assumption being that anybody, regardless of sex/gender, could go to a barbers (i.e. shop=hairdressers, hairdressers=barbers) and get their hair cut (normally in a traditionally male-style).

The current scheme of:


is not specific (what type of hairdressers is this?), incorrectly uses the male=yes tag (which is about access restrictions), and presents potential sex/gender issues when there need be none (less inclusive).


From: nathan case <nathancase at outlook.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 2:13 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools <tagging at openstreetmap.org>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Barbershop

“male=yes tag, as it refers to the style, not the gender as in the Equality Act"

That seems to me like redefining of the tag. It certainly isn’t what the wiki says (though, of course, I acknowledge the wiki isn’t a rule book). The female/male=yes tag is clearly defined as a restriction based on sex or gender. It is not about what style or service a place offers/caters to.

If you want to use those tags in that way, you’d have to redefine them to include “target audience” i.e. “Denotes that access is restricted *or generally targeted* to persons of the female/male sex or gender”

To clarify, I’m not suggesting redefining the meanings of those tags. I am saying that “shop=hairdressers, male=yes” is not sufficient to accurately describe a barbers. The female/male tag could, of course, be used alongside another tag but only (as defined) to indicate if the restriction to a sex/gender does truly exist.


From: Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com<mailto:dieterdreist at gmail.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 1:48 PM
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools <tagging at openstreetmap.org<mailto:tagging at openstreetmap.org>>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Barbershop

sent from a phone

On 3 Mar 2021, at 14:17, nathan case <nathancase at outlook.com<mailto:nathancase at outlook.com>> wrote:
One issue with use of female/male tags is that those tags explicitly say “access is *restricted* to persons of the [female]/[male] sex or gender". (Emphasis on restricted)

This is not true for barbers or hairdressers in the UK. In fact, it would be illegal (The Equality Act 2010).

it’s not seen to be a legal restriction, it‘s as you pointed out, a reference to the hair styles they offer. Maybe I’d have the right in the UK to get an appointment at the gynecologist, but they won‘t be able to benefit from the skills they’re good at. If you’re a biological male but want a male haircut, you could still benefit from the male=yes tag, as it refers to the style, not the gender as in the Equality Act.

In some regions this may be different and it may be legally forbidden, but this is within the expectations you can have from OpenStreetMap tagging when it comes to delicate topics like gender, things have to be interpreted in relation to the context.

Cheers Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210303/de09e760/attachment.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list