[Tagging] Tanning Salons
clifford at snowandsnow.us
Sun Mar 14 19:33:08 UTC 2021
First let me apologize if anyone took my statement that Simmon's comments
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 11:20 AM Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:
> This was already beaten to death the last time it was raised here.
Just because it wasn't settled doesn't mean it shouldn't be. Obviously
there is an issue. So how do we get consensus?
> - tanning salons are not beauty parlours (shop=beauty)
In the sense of what we typically see as a beauty parlours, I agree. But
what's the purpose of a tanning salon? Isn't it to make you feel better
about your looks. It certainly is't for health benefits.
> - they are, often self-service, tanning facilities, that if moved to
> anywhere else, should be moved to amenity
The wiki defines amenity as " For describing useful and important
facilities for visitors and residents. Facilities include for example
toilets, telephones, banks, pharmacies, prisons and schools." If you agree
with the wiki, it doesn't fit under amenity as I'd never describe a tanning
salon as a useful and important facility for visitors and residents.
> - iD being wrong is not an argument
According to the wiki, iD isn't wrong. iD is a major editor. That it uses
shop=beauity + beauty=tanning_salon is a useful bit of information.
> - yes they don't seem to exist in the states, so I would suggest simply
> not to map them, which should be -real- easy.
Not only do they exist in the US, but we have plenty of them.
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging