Talk:Key:club

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Proposal Status

The proposal https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Club was listed as "approved" from January 2015 to April 2019, however, with 72% positive votes it failed to meet the usual standard of 80% for approval, thus it should have been marked as "rejected". I will change the status from "Approved" to "In use" --Jeisenbe (talk) 01:54, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Oops, the standard was different before March 2019: see Proposal_process#Approved - 50% only was required back then, so it was approved. --Jeisenbe (talk) 00:18, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Gender-based

Women's clubs? Men's clubs? How about LGBTQ clubs?

Also, what to do about multi-axis clubs? For example, Korean Women's Club?

- KTyler 21:49, 10 June 2012 (BST)

Akin to how club=religious adds denomination, I recommend that club=ethnic add club:ethnicity=*

Also, I suggest club=gender followed by club:gender=* (e.g. women, men, female, male, boy, girl, transgender, nongender, etc. etc.) - KTyler 21:51, 10 June 2012 (BST)

There are other tags that use the syntax club:for=man/woman Warin61 (talk) 12:55, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Age based

Some clubs are aged based - they have a variety of interests and cannot be classified that way. As they classify them selves based on age so should OM classify them that way. club=youth and club=elderly may both be valid. The present club=scout could be merged with club=youth, as there are other organisations that do similar things to the scouts. Warin61 (talk) 00:53, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Student (academic) organisations

There are many types of student organisatsions around the world. What about tagging them club=student and specifying club:student=* - eg. fraternity (male), sorority (female), society (mixed)? In german there is some work done with verbindung=*, which could be covered with fraternity:type=verbindung and the rest with fraternity:*=*, sorority:*=* or society:*=* specifying *:type=* - eg. alumni (graduate clubs), corporation (male or female), nation (county-based mixed student organisations in Sweden and Finland), keeping general tagging in english and official name in name=* tag (eg. Arminia Wunderbar, Korporatsioon Vahva, Fabelaktig Nation, Satumainen Osakunda). -- Joosep-Georg 23:44, 7 August 2012 (BST)

leisure=club = Bad Idea

=> Talk:Tag:leisure=club --AndiG88 (talk) 19:30, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

On relation?

How do we use this tags on relations (except multipolygon)? Is there some club relation? I suppose that this page should have onRelation=no. Chrabros (talk) 07:21, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Private or men's club?

How would you tag a private club? It's more of a venue where members go and eat or drink or attend events rather than a group of people who meet at a certain location, I'd think --Marion Barry (talk) 18:17, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Technology clubs

Why is there "club=linux" on the list but not any more general option for technology clubs? --Paavobave (talk) 12:44, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Affliliation

In the United Kingdom, we have federations of clubs. Social and workingmen's(note to non-Brits: workingmen's clubs admit women despite the name) clubs are often CIU-affliated and members of one club may enjoy "visitor" privileges at another club within the federation. Rugby football comes in "union" and "league" rulesets and the clubs are affiliated to the Rugby Union or the Rugby League. I propose club=* and club:affiliation=* to denote this. CIU workingmen's club tagged as such to provide a sample. HelenNE (talk) 00:53, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Tagging for the render

So far this tag does not appear to render, to low a count? So .. it will render the name if it is combined with another feature, say a building, and the render then picks up the name. Longer term hopefully this tag will render by itself without the other feature. Warin61 (talk) 12:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

I did raise a Carto suggestion (https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4489) to render all clubs together as a single icon, but predictably, it went nowhere because "we don't want to" :-( --Fizzie41 (talk) 22:49, 29 June 2022 (UTC)