Proposal:Amenity=lounge
| Amenity=lounge | |
|---|---|
| Proposal status: | Rejected (inactive) |
| Proposed by: | Lega4 |
| Draft started: | 2024-10-07 |
| RFC start: | 2024-10-07 |
| Vote start: | 2024-10-24 |
| Vote end: | 2024-10-30 |
Proposal
This proposal sets the de-jure status for de-facto used tag amenity=lounge. The tag is designed to clearly mark lounges (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airport_lounge): comfortable waiting/recreational area usually requiring either some form of membership or fee to enter. These facilities usually can be found in big transport hubs such as airports and big train stations.
The proposed tag would be applicable to the following database elements:
Nodes: Minimal way to indicate presence of a lounge at the given coordinates.
Areas: For indoor mapping, this can be used to mark existing indoor=room as a lounge. Also this can be used if a lounge is located in a separated building.
Rationale
There are more than 1600 airport lounges around the globe accessible with Priority Pass program, as well as many others participating in different membership programs (e.g. more than 100 in Russia via Every Lounge or 15 rail lounges in Germany via DB). Many credit cards providers advertise their product highlighting the advantage of providing free access to the lounges. So there is definitely a lot of public interest in those.
The chosen tag amenity=lounge is straightforward, minimizing confusion while aligning with the existing OSM naming conventions. While the tag might look similar to amenity=lounger or amenity=hookah lounge, the meaning in very different, so it cannot be confused during mapping. Proposed tag emphasizes the facility's primary function, which is distinct from bars, restaurants, hookah places or general waiting areas.
amenity=lounge is already de-facto used to tag lounges in the airports around the world and has a documented wiki page, so the main goal of this proposal is to set the status de-jure as well.
Tagging
Definition
Lounge is a comfortable area, typically located in a transport hub (airport or train station). Usually it also provides some extra amenities such as Key:shower, or cleaner Key:toilets, better Key:internet access as well as Key:bar and Key:food.
What makes a lounge distinct from bar/restaurant/waiting area is:
- Limited access. Most of the known lounges limit access to the members of different programs (such as Priority Pass, Every Lounge), so membership=yes/required should be used. Some of the lounges might allow non-members to pay-to-enter (fee=*, consider also adding charge=*). If the lounge does not allow pay-to-enter, access=private+private=members must be used.
Additional Tags Used in Combination
| Tag | Description |
|---|---|
| name=* | Almost always lounges have a name. |
| operator=* | Use when lounge is part of some network or affiliated with some transportation company (American Express, Delta, American Airlines, KLM, DB). |
| fee=* | Add if the lounge allows pay-to-enter |
| charge=* | If the lounge allows pay-to-enter, specify the amount. |
| access=* | If the lounge does not allow pay-to-enter, but only allows members to access, set `access=private` and `private=members` |
| private=members | If the lounge does not allow pay-to-enter, but only allows members to access, set `access=private` and `private=members` |
| membership=* | Specify whether some kind of membership is `required` to enter or if lounge accepts pay-to-enter as well as some members (`yes`) |
| description=* | Add more detailed information about the lounge and access |
Comparison with current tagging schemes
- Tag:room=lounge (321 occurrences)
- Often incorrectly used for prayer rooms (should use Tag:amenity=place of worship instead)
- Where it's used for lounges, in only describes *room* specifically, which makes it not intuitive to use on nodes. So current proposal supersedes this usage and using `amenity=lounge` would be preferred for indoor mapping (Tag:indoor=room).
- Tag:amenity=bar
- While many bars have "Lounge" in their name, it does not mean the place is an `amenity=lounge`.
- Mapping lounges as "bars" (unknown amount, hard to query, but at least 1) leads to confusion from both sides: someone looking for a bar will be disappointed if he gets to the lounge's entrance, same as someone looking for a lounge is not necessarily is seeking for a bar.
- Tag:public transport=lounge
- Has just 22 usages worldwide (mostly for lounges at train stations in Europe)
- Was never as popular as `amenity=lounge` (tag history)
Elements tagged
- Nodes: Minimal way to indicate presence of a lounge at the given coordinates.
- Areas: For indoor mapping, this can be used to mark existing indoor=room as a lounge. Also this can be used if a lounge is located in a separated building.
Examples
Eurostar waiting lounge.
Interiors of a customer lounge exclusive for certain card-holders in a mall in Manila
Frequent-flyer lounge, LH at FRA here
Air Canada lounge at LHR
.jpg)
Rendering
Ideally the lounges should be rendered in the consumers and OSM Carto with some distinctive icon. I think couch icon (from `shop=furniture`) is a good and easy option unless we can find or design the better icon. Many public icons refer to lounges as some kind of chair/couch with possible a small table with drinks on it. As the main point of lounges is to provide a relaxed space, couch seems quite suitable. Also it's unlikely to have any furniture shops around the lounge (typically in airports or train stations), so it won't be confused with the shop.
Possible icon to be used for lounges
Features/Pages affected
External discussions
Please discuss the proposal in Community forum https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/rfc-feature-proposal-amenity-lounge/119794
Comments
Please discuss the proposal in Community forum https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/rfc-feature-proposal-amenity-lounge/119794, or alternatively 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 have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. -- No "de-jure tags" (as mentioned above) in the OSM. Something B (talk) 09:39, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
I oppose this proposal. The term "lounge" is too generic and such tag will be misused. amenity=transport_lounge would be a better fit. --julcnx (talk) 09:44, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
I approve this proposal. --Sbre (talk) 10:19, 24 October 2024 (UTC)- I oppose this proposal. As I already commented during the discussion, I agree with julcnx that the term chosen is way too generic. --Mueschel (talk) 10:31, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. I assume I can use the same to indicate presence of a waiting area at amenity=reception_desk in offices, restaurants and hotels, so I would not restrict the tag to "transport" only. --Bkil (talk) 11:13, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. there is no such thing as de-jure tags in OSM - see ATYL, and I believe it was mentioned in discussion. Also: is it supposed to be only for transport lounges? If no then mentioning other would be nice, if yes then tag name is bad Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:38, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. The name of the tag should make it clear that it is not only a nice waiting area, but more specifically a paid-for or otherwise exclusive room. I also know of exclusive VIP lounges at stadiums, do they count? --Jofban (talk) 14:54, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. as I said in the discussion, I believe these should be tagged as special kind of waiting area, e.g. adding fee=yes and maybe lounge=yes/type. —-Dieterdreist (talk) 15:38, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. If this is specifically for waiting area lounges, then (as others have said) I think it would be better treated as a special type of waiting area. amenity=lounge seems too generic a term for this usecase. Rjw62 (talk) 15:35, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. The tag name is too generic which will likely lead to misuse. --Dafadllyn (talk) 17:09, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. Lounge is too generic and like to be misused --Trigpoint (talk) 17:23, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. While I support tagging these features, I have to agree with others that "lounge" is too generic of a term for this and prone to both misuse and overtagging. The proposal currently seems to be aimed at transport hub "lounges", which is what the value should be then. If current use is for "airport lounge" (which sounds like a specialized feature), then these need to be changed. HellMap (talk) 21:30, 27 October 2024 (UTC)