Proposed features/toy library

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Toy library
Status: Approved (active)
Proposed by: ChameleonScales
Tagging: amenity=toy_library
Applies to: node area
Definition: organization, institution or business that possesses a collection of toys and games, organizes game activities and may offer a rental service.
Drafted on: 2018-10-10
RFC start: 2019-10-01
Vote start: 2019-10-13
Vote end: 2019-10-27

Proposal

Proposing a new feature for toy libraries. Toy libraries are places that specifically only rent out games and toys, but no books. They are mostly popular in Europe and are named a variation of 'ludothek' there, a hybrid portmanteau of latin for play and greek for collection.

Toy libraries are often nonprofit organizations and have limited opening times. Their audience varies, young children (4-10 years old) are often their central audience, but many also have rentals for older children (10-14 years old) such as RC cars and video games. They typically do not cater to adults.

Some toy libraries only allow customers to quickly check out a game, then rent it out for home use. Others allow playing games on site. If this is allowed, then supervision by personnel is often deliberately quite limited, as they are often staffed by volunteers. They may also restrict onsite playing to children of an age that don't need constant supervision. This sets them apart from daycares where children play under the view of professionally trained employees.

Wikipedia has some more information. The English Wikipedia page is relatively sparse so you may want to check out the German and French Wikipedia page too.

Rationale

Toy libraries don't fit in any existing category.

  • Tagging them as libraries is not ideal because people will expect to find books there.
  • Tagging them as toy stores isn't good either because toy libraries don't typically sell games.
  • Tagging them as childcare also doesn't work because while a toy library might allow children to stay there playing games, they don't have the supervision standards required to be called a proper childcare facility.

Some are non-profit organizations but some are not. Some merely lend out games, others also allow children to stay on site and play games under varying levels of supervision.

I think it would be best for them to have their own feature because overall, despite their differences, they're all connected by their activity and finding them on a map can be useful to parents of young children trying to find a place to play games and rent them for home use.

Examples

The examples are very numerous. You can find a dozen of them in a single city like Toulouse in France. About 175 of them have already been mapped over the past years, mostly in central Europe. There are probably at least a few thousand of them in central Europe totally. According to Wikipedia at least one of them exists in Los Angeles, presumably a lot more actually do.

Overpass query


Tagging

Tag Description
amenity=toy_library organization, institution or business that possesses a collection of toys and games, offers a rental service and may organize game activities.
toy_library:for=child Offers toys that are designed for children
toy_library:for=everybody Offers toys that are designed for people of all ages
toy_library:for=disabled Offers toys that are designed for people with special needs

Applies to

Nodes node and areas area

Rendering

Just like libraries and book stores use the same icon except in different colors, toy libraries could use the toy store icon in a different color.

ToyLibrary-14.svg

Features/Pages affected

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features

Voting amenity=toy_library

Instructions for 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
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal.
{{vote|yes}} --~~~~
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. reason
{{vote|no}} reason --~~~~ Replace reason with your reason(s) for voting no.
  • I abstain from voting but have comments I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. comments
{{vote|abstain}} comments --~~~~ If you want don't want to vote but have comments. Replace comments with your comments.

Note: The ~~~~ automatically inserts your name and the current date.

  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --EneaSuper (talk) 07:55, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Taktaal (talk) 09:48, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. -- Baptistemm (talk) 11:52, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Brian de Ford (talk) 12:34, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. -- Rjw62 (talk) 17:05, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --SelfishSeahorse (talk) 17:26, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. I'm fine with the main tag proposed, and the subkey toy_library:for=* is good, however the values should be adjusted for consistency. Look at social_faility:for and community_centre:for, they use singular forms, while the proposal above is a grammar mix. Suitable would be =child, =disabled, etc. --Polarbear w (talk) 19:03, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Yeah that's probably a good thing to change to keep stuff consistent --Taktaal (talk) 19:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for adjusting the values. --Polarbear w (talk) 10:36, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --PeterPan99 (talk) 19:06, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Gendy54 (talk) 20:05, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. —Dieterdreist (talk) 20:22, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Fizzie41 (talk) 22:33, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Fanfouer (talk) 16:40, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Leni (talk) 18:41, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. Singing-Poppy (talk) 08:13, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --AgusQui (talk) 14:10, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Dr Centerline (talk) 16:20, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Jeisenbe (talk) 01:18, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Nordpfeil (talk) 16:46, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Mannivu (talk) 14:24, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Doublah (talk) 01:35, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --GiantOSM (talk) 09:11, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --TheBlackMan (talk) 16:15, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Highflyer74 (talk) 16:59, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. No real reason to deny this. It is a real thing, it doesn't have a specific tag yet. All for it, I say! --Empers (talk) 19:44, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Marc marc (talk) 20:44, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Voting closed

Voting on this proposal has been closed.

It was approved with 25 votes for, 0 votes against and 0 abstentions.

Proposal was accepted unanimously

External discussions

Tagging mailing list

Comments

Please comment on the discussion page.