Proposal talk:Visitors attire

Refining the format

Resolved: This provisions has been dropped from the proposal.

Apologies for the advice in the last page. I see you changed it to a new version.

• swimwear=yes, swimwear=no: From experience for these rules it's better to use swimwear=allowed, and swimwear=prohibited to clarify and be uniform with other val. Yes/no should only be used as a unspecified positive or negative.
• swimwear=required: As noted, this and swimwear=forbidden have some overlap with nudium=*
• swimwear=required_bottom_required: Overlap with topless=* (if eg swimwear:top:female=* is not desirable)
• , swimwear=optional_women_only: Still better to use swimwear:female=allowed + swimwear:male=prohibited than this clumsy and messy mix
• swimwear=regular: This is a rather "subjective" adjective. Maybe swimwear=standard is less worse.
• swimwear=continous: I don't understand why not swimwear=one-piece

--- Kovposch (talk) 05:30, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

swimwear=* and nudism=* is orthogonal, but with some implications (e.g. swimwear=required -> nudism=no). But absence of swimwear not always is nudism. And swimwear=required also indicate that, for example underwear isn't allowed - this is normal requirements for aquatics halls. --Something B (talk) 08:24, 5 October 2022‎ (UTC)

swimwear=* vs. wear=*

Resolved: This provisions has been dropped from the proposal.

Is there a reason for using wear:top:female=* instead of swimwear:top:female=*? --Martianfreeloader (talk) 10:58, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

"Wear" is more generic term, and may be used also out of "swimwear" context. Something B (talk) 11:31, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Couldn't the same be said about shorts? I mean, why generically call it "wear" if it covers breasts but specifically "swimwear" if it is a pair shorts (can also be swimwear or not)? --Martianfreeloader (talk) 12:03, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

wear:shorts:female=*? Something B (talk) 12:13, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

No, I mean like swimwear=required would mean that men have to cover their genitals in many cultures. But just like female breasts, nobody cares if they do this with actual swimwear or some other clothing. --Martianfreeloader (talk) 12:18, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Aquatic centers typically don't allow something different from swimwear by hygienic reasons. swimwear=required mean that you are not allowed going to the pool in underwear, plain clothes, etc. Only things that are designed for swimming. Something B (talk) 12:26, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Then you should use nudism:top:female=* or dress_code:top:female=* etc. wear:*=* has no useful meaning. -- Kovposch (talk) 12:56, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

nudism:top:female=* is semantically incorrect, because topless practice isn't nudism. Something B (talk) 13:43, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Alternative is:

• dress:top:female=any_opaque
• dress:top:female=optional - women may be topless
• topless:female=yes/no
• dress=swimwear - swimwear required
• dress=standard_swimwear - standard swimwear required, no thong or clumsy suits
• dress=swimwear;none - swimwear optional, but other clothes not allowed.
• dress:female=swimwear;none & dress:male=none - swimwear optional for women, but prohibited for men. Opinions? Something B (talk) 13:33, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

shorten to one-piece

Resolved: This provisions has been dropped from the proposal.

Can we shorten swimwear:female=classic_one-piece to swimwear:female=one-piece? I'm not an expert on swimwear. --Martianfreeloader (talk) 11:06, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Some swimwear is technically one-piece, but different from the typical one-piece swimsuits, for example, a bikini with pieces that are connected by strip. Something B (talk) 11:31, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Tag contains hyphen

Resolved: This provisions has been dropped from the proposal.

I just want to point out that I've rarely seen hyphens in tags (as in swimwear:female=classic_one-piece). But I don't see any problem with that. --Martianfreeloader (talk) 11:06, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Hyphens are allowed for values, but may be replaced by underscore in this case without losing the meaning. Something B (talk) 11:31, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Swimming caps

Resolved: Out of scope

I went for a swim at a pool in Andorra and the lifeguard shouted at me for not wearing a swimming cap. Is it 'swimwear'? Jnicho02 (talk) 14:14, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

In common sense, no. Something B (talk) 14:18, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

For this, is "top" better termed "upper" for torso? Use *:head=* or *:hair=* for cap. There would be rules for tying up long hair, if not needing a cap (or helmet, going into safety and protection regulations) yet. --- Kovposch (talk) 16:19, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

In the context of clothing “top” means “torso”. Maybe “head” or “headwear”. It could also be useful for religious sites which require head coverings (or no head coverings) Amᵃᵖanda (talk) 12:23, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

In Ireland, pools commonly require swimming hats. Amᵃᵖanda (talk) 12:23, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

dress_code=none shouldn't mean “no clothes”

Resolved: This provisions has been dropped from the proposal.

dress_code=none - clothes (include swimwear) not allowed;

I (a native english speaker) think this is confusingly worded. “There is no dress code” means “you can wear what you want (i.e. anything from full nudity to a burkini). “no clothing allowed” means there is a dress code (full nudity). dress_code=full_nudity would be clearer. Amᵃᵖanda (talk)

Thanks! Something B (talk) 12:30, 11 October 2022 (UTC)