Proposal:Barbers
| Tag:hairdresser=barber | |
|---|---|
| Proposal status: | Approved (active) |
| Proposed by: | Casey boy |
| Tagging: | hairdresser=barber |
| Applies to: | node, area, relation |
| Definition: | A type of hairdresser that traditionally specialises in cutting masculine styles and providing other male grooming services such as beard trimming. |
| Statistics: |
|
| Draft started: | 2024-01-30 |
| RFC start: | 2024-02-02 |
| Vote start: | 2024-02-26 |
| Vote end: | 2024-03-11 |
Proposal
This proposal is to formally introduce hairdresser=barber, as a sub-key of the shop=hairdresser tag and as the accepted way of tagging barber shops.
Rationale
Barbers traditionally provide masculine style hair cuts, as well male-oriented as services such as beard trimming. They are unlikely to provide traditionally feminine hairdressing styles or services. In some countries, barbers may require specific licencing. Barber shops are often distinct from hairdresser salons but they may sometimes be co-located within the same building/business as a hairdressing salon.
The distinction between a hairdresser salon and a barbers varies. In some countries, the distinction may not exist at all. However, some common examples of what can be found in a barbers are: specific furniture (salon vs barbers chairs), a barber's pole (either real poles or images of them), imagery examples of masculine hair styles, silhouettes of male faces with beards, imagery of razors, blades and clippers or those items on display, sometimes with themes around (traditionally male) sports or music. They may also have the word "barber" in their decoration or shop name.
Other distinctions are that barbers may tend to focus on using razors and clippers, rather than scissors, when cutting hair. They tend to be cheaper and quicker than a salon, and are more open to walk-in appointments (though this will depend on location and brand).
Current tagging
Currently, the documented way to tag barber shops is simply shop=hairdresser + male=yes.
However, this is problematic for a few reasons:
- male=* (and its counterpart female=*) is documented as an access restriction, rather than indicating the gender of the intended customers or style/service provided. Although usage is mixed.
- Saying that barbershops are for men only relies on out-dated gender stereotypes. Whilst traditionally focussed on “male-styled” cuts and masculine services (beard trimming), many barbershops will happily provide services to women. Indeed, in many countries, it would be illegal for them not to (e.g., USA, EU, UK, Australia).
- Nearly half of all shop=hairdresser (~12,000 out of 25,000) are tagged with both male=yes and female=yes. It is unclear whether these are unisex hairdresser salons that cater for men, or barbers that also cater for women.
There are around 9,300 instances of shop=hairdresser + male=yes + (female!=yes or female!=*), suggesting there are many barber shops mapped in OSM.
Benefits of suggested tagging
Introducing specific tagging for barbers has the benefit of:
- Unambiguous tagging for data consumers
- No reliance on gender stereotypes
- Proposed tagging scheme does not break current data consumers/users. If a data consumer doesn’t understand hairdresser=barber, it should still understand shop=hairdresser which is better than nothing.
- Enables actual access restrictions to be appropriately mapped. For example, if it is truly not allowed for women to visit a barbershop (perhaps in certain jurisdictions), tagging would be: shop=hairdresser + hairdresser=barber + female=no.
Other options
Various other options exist that could be used to tag barber explicitly. For example:
Pro: the main "pro" to this approach is that a barber shop is tagged on its own merit, rather than as a sub-key, reflecting the distinct nature of a barber shop compared to a hairdresser's salon.
Con: this would be a breaking change for data consumers, with little actual benefit from a data perspective. Barber POIs that are currently mapped would likely "fall off the map" (and new ones not appear) until renderers updated their code. However, if tagged using the suggested tagging, barbers would still appear on the map. Icons could be updated (if a renderer deemed this as needed) without breaking current rendering.
- shop=hairdresser + barber=yes/no/only - value tagging to indicate whether a hairdresser is a barbers ("only"), has a separate barbers chair/section ("yes"), or does not have a barbers ("no").
Pro: flexible tagging that does not introduce breaking changes for data consumers.
Con: values are not immediately obvious for a mapper, without reading documentation. May result in some confusion (particularly the distinction between "yes" and "only") or introduction of unusual/unexpected values.
After discussions on the Community Forum, a poll found that the most popular approach to specific tagging for barber shops was hairdresser=barber. There is already some usage of this tag (264 instances at the time of writing).
Tagging
A barber shop would be tagged as:
preferably along with tags such as name=*, opening_hours=* etc. For barbers that do not allow women, female=no would also be added.
Other hairdresser= values:
Although not strictly part of this proposal, there has been general support to use comma delimited lists to represent other hairdressers.
- hairdresser=barber - a barber shop
- hairdresser=salon - a hairdresser's salon (note "salon" in this context does not infer any link to shop=beauty)
- hairdresser=barber;salon - a hairdresser that has a separate barbers and salon as part of the same business (example)
- hairdresser=unisex - a potential option for a hairdresser that does not fit into a barber or salon categorisation
Examples
Barber shop in Lake Placid, Florida
Barber shop in Lynwood, California
Barber shop at the Charlton Park Historic Village and Museum, Michigan
Barber shop in Palma
Barber shop in Novosibirsk
.jpg)
Rendering
Seeing as this is a sub-key, rendering is likely to default to the same as shop=hairdresser.
Features/Pages affected
External discussions
- https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/tagging-of-barbers-barbershops/107657/
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:shop%3Dhairdresser#Barbers_and_Hairdressers_are_Very_Different
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Barbershop
Comments
Please comment on the discussion page.
Voting
- Log in to the wiki if you are not already logged in.
- Scroll down to voting and click 'Edit source'. Copy and paste the appropriate code from this table on its own line at the bottom of the text area:
| To get this output | you type | Description |
|---|---|---|
|
{{vote|yes}} --~~~~
|
Feel free to also explain why you support proposal. |
|
{{vote|no}} reason --~~~~
|
Replace reason with your reason(s) for voting no. |
|
{{vote|abstain}} comments --~~~~
|
If you don't want to vote but have comments. Replace comments with your comments. |
~~~~ automatically inserts your name and the current date.For full template documentation see Template:Vote. See also how vote outcome is processed.
I oppose this proposal. As per previous detailed discussions. --Bkil (talk) 16:25, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Bkil:can you link to one posting summarizing your position? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:26, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. I appreciate launching this proposal and voting, but I think the subtag should be barber=(yes/no/only), because it's more descriptive, comprehensive and unambiguous, as discussed in the wiki discussion page. --AntMadeira (talk) 18:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
I approve this proposal. The existing tagging scheme with shop=hairdresser, male=yes and female=yes is probably sufficient for some countries. But in other countries such as the UK, hair salons and barbershops are considered two different shop types. They look different both from the outside and inside, have different pricing, and use different techniques. We have been lumping them in together under shop=hairdresser and this tag will give us a way of differentiating them. --Osmuser63783 (talk) 18:38, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. have been using it like that before the proposal myself already --B-unicycling (talk) 21:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. It is interesting to have an scalable scheme --Yopaseopor (talk) 22:06, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. Seems reasonable and well thought thru. JesseFW (talk) 00:35, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. Make sense to me. --Sylv1_Durif (talk) 10:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. I'd vote yes for a barber=* tag as argued in the discussion page, but not for this one. --Hauke-stieler (talk) 14:45, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --JeroenHoek (talk) 17:30, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. -- Something B (talk) 17:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --ArcticRocinante (talk) 21:12, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. -- I'd like to avoid two primary tags on most hairdressers in Europe an I'm strongly in favor of a secondary tag hairdresser=... (and against pseudo-boolean barber=yes/no/only) as argued in the discussion page. --Geonick (talk) 00:11, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Geonick:you've voted no but your rationale suggests you're in favour of the proposal ("I'm strongly in favor of a secondary tag hairdresser=" which is what this proposal is). Did you mean to vote yes instead? Casey boy (talk) 11:41, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Fortera (talk) 08:34, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --CaldeiraG (talk) 11:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Sammyhawkrad (talk) 11:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --EneaSuper (talk) 14:11, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Timonade (talk) 14:40, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. — Jake Low (talk) 03:10, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Voting on this proposal has been closed.
It was approved with 18 votes for, 4 votes against and 0 abstentions.
Approved with 18 yes votes (82% of votes).
| The Feature Page for the approved proposal Barbers is located at Tag:hairdresser=barber |