Talk:Proposed features/changing table

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This page is meant to discuss this proposal before it goes to the voting process.

Contact with downstream users

I recommend gathering previously contacted users here and consider contacting some more major ones, feel free to edit. Bkil (talk) 21:27, 20 April 2019 (UTC)



  • ...
StreetComplete has a quest too: [1] Rorym (talk) 15:50, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Done --Valor Naram (talk) 17:29, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Additional tags: vending/dispensing

I'm not sure whether these words or the following scheme is the best, but I hope you get the idea what I'm trying to map:

Bkil (talk) 21:27, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

I appreciate your feedback but currently I am not sure how to embed this in this proposal. See the "In otherwise covered locations" section at Tag:amenity=vending_machine. The suggestion made by the users there fits best to our mapping technique. --Valor Naram (talk) 21:58, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
You should consider creating another proposal because this is unrelated to changing a nappy. You ask about the possibility, if there's a vending/disvending for equipment needed for changing nappies. --Valor Naram (talk) 10:42, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Is nappy_changing:location=toilets equivalent to nappy_changing:location=unisex?

Bkil (talk) 21:27, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

I would say "No" because we have seperated restrooms for each gender except of divers (it's not really a one-hit gender instead it's a mix of the variations between male and female) and just "toilet" means toilet in general speaking AND NOT gender specified. It also doesn't imply the availability of a unisex toilet since just saying "toilet" means for the most that there's a restroom for men and women. But saying there's a "unisex toilet" states that there's a unisex toilet for all genders available and not just toilets for men and women.

Note: I don't use the name "nappy_changing_table" for the feature. I use "baby_changing_table" instead.--Valor Naram (talk) 22:07, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Well, the place I had in mind only had a unisex toilet - a single, unsegregated entrance with possible multiple booths. In this case, the two are equivalent. However, if there exist two entrances: one unisex and one wheelchair, then it is reasonable to differentiate the two. Bkil (talk) 10:01, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
See the "location" subkey. --Valor Naram (talk) 10:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Tag key should be "changing_table"

The purpose of the table is to facilitate changing the baby's nappies not the change of the baby.

And it makes the keys shorter.

See Wikipedia

--voschix (talk) 09:12, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

In English "to change the baby" or "baby changing" means to change the baby's nappy, not actually changing the baby for another baby Rorym (talk)
Done --Valor Naram (talk) 10:45, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Don't just limit to tables

The current proposal is baby_changing_table=*, but the common values for diaper=* include things like diaper=room, diaper=table, diaper=bench, so I think limiting this tag to just tables is bad. May I suggest baby_changing_facilities=* instead? Rorym (talk) 15:48, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Changing table is the official name for this facility. See also and --Valor Naram (talk) 17:45, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes, "table" is the name of the changing table. But what if a venue provides a baby changing table inside a separate baby changing room (as opposed to a baby changing table in a semi-seculded place?) Don't we want to map what kind, if any baby changing facilities there are, not just tables? Rorym (talk) 18:34, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Take a look at the 'changing_table:location' subkey. There's a value that indicates that a changing table is in a 'semi-seculed' place or as I call it 'dedicated room'. If the proposal success (gets approved), you will set "changing_table:location" to "dedicated_room" in order to tag this. --Valor Naram (talk) 19:10, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether these words or the following scheme is the best, but I hope you get the idea what I'm trying to map: nappy_changing:services=bench;shelf;potty;pillow;pad;straps;tilting;... Bkil (talk) 19:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Related to --Valor Naram (talk) 19:48, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, could you please explain how it is related, other than that the word "services" is accidentally present in both blocks of text? Let me rephrase that these sections aren't asking to use a specific key, I'm asking about possible subkeys. So my question is fully isomorphic to asking what you think about this one: changing_table:features=bench;shelf;potty;pillow;pad;straps;tilting;... Not sure what other features can be found nearby changing tables, maybe there could be more useful ones. Bkil (talk) 20:46, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Of course. See Roryms answer "[...] but the common values for diaper=* include things like diaper=room, diaper=table, diaper=bench [Formatting added], so I think limiting this tag to just tables is bad." He mentioned adding the "services" like you said. Bench is just an example he's given. --Valor Naram (talk) 07:23, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Alright then. I wasn't sure that you were considering extra services. I thought that Roryms used this for arguing against the main key "baby_changing_table" and wanted something more general. Some may want to extend the main key values yes/no/limited with the above, but I'd probably like to see a separate subkey for this. Bkil (talk) 09:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Implemented a subkey "features" for the purpose you mentioned. --Valor Naram (talk) 12:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

changing table in shop

I'd be glad to see an example how to map a changing table which is part of the shop and so bound to the opening hours of it. Should the tag be a separate node? Could it be added to the shop node? This is how it looks and it's very common now in drugstores:

Yes, this proposal makes adding to existing nodes from e.g. shops possible.

Possible tagging after proposal approval:

  • shop=chemist
  • changing_table=yes

I may need to enhance the "changing_table:location" subkey --Valor Naram (talk) 18:36, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

changing_table:location=shop, wall, sales_area? Bkil (talk) 20:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Added "sales_area" to value list of subkey "location" --Valor Naram (talk) 12:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
It would be useful to know if diapers are available (for free / a fee). in the picture above you see that they are offered as a free service to take. --Panoramedia (talk) 18:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
See the above suggestions for services/vending/dispensing. For example, this could include changing_table:dispensing=nappy;gloves;hand_sanitizer;paper_towel + changing_table:features=pad;waste_basket. If I understood correctly, Valor Naram recommended vending_machine=nappy;gloves;hand_sanitizer;paper_towel + vending_machine:fee=no instead (there also exists a proposal for amenity=dispenser). Bkil (talk) 20:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
The proposal is located at Proposed features/Dispenser. --Tigerfell This user is member of the wiki team of OSM (Let's talk) 12:01, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
I would suggest creating another proposal which extends Template:Key:vending This isn't related to change of the nappy of a baby but to buy/get equipment for changing nappies. --Valor Naram (talk) 10:38, 23 April 2019 (UTC)


Can I suggest to split introducing byzantine tagging scheme (changing_table:capacity=*, changing_table:features=*) with deprecating diaper=* (and introducing replacement)? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:31, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

People also wanted to tag capacity/count when using diaper, so suggesting a replacement is a must:
Could you please clarify your exact concern with specifying features? Do you think that it could block this proposal from acceptance? We had a question about it just recently #changing_table_in_shop. Bkil (talk) 20:57, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
I think that it is not necessary for a new tagging scheme to allow tagging every single subdetail, including ones unlikely to be ever actually used on a wider scale Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:58, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
This proposal has two goals: Providing a replacement for "diaper" and improving it by adding more details which are purely optional to tag. Each mapper should decide on its own how many details he/she/it wants to tag. If you're one of them and think that just tagging "changing_table=yes" and "changing_table:location=female_toilet" is enough than just do it. No one forces you to tag every detail.
Note: I also suggested that I can add a section as a simple replacement solution like "diaper=yes|no" --> "changing_table=yes|no" --Valor Naram (talk) 12:23, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Agree with Mateusz Konieczny, this proposal is way too overcomplicated. --Westnordost (talk) 21:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
I could add a section for "diaper" users where I just explain the replacements (simplifying) --Valor Naram (talk) 05:06, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
That is a very good idea and others have indicated earlier that such a table would please them. --Bkil (talk) 17:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)


Why is this change needed? Looking at the arguments I don't get it. The wheelchair issue is covered by diaper:wheelchair (see also taginfo), it's just -as do often -not documented in the wiki. Also all other proposed details can be done with diaper:* as well. Most of them are even already done. The confusion point is also a bit far fetched. Anybody having contact with a diaper change knows that there are changing tables and that isolated dispensing/disposal sites for diapers essentially don't exist. And if: they would be tagged by vending/disposal. For the BE/AE argument. That's a good rule if you look at ou vs. o spelling, but is imho not meant as something to artificially pick terms where most of the world just looks at you astounded. But even if: what's the benefit of changing a tad that is known, implemented, and coherently used in many sites?? --Morray (talk) 12:59, 26 April 2019 (UTC) Morray (talk) 12:59, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Because the key 'diaper' has been often misunderstood and there's the possibility that it can be also used wrong. The mailing list stated some misunderstandings like "tagging a place where you can buy/get diapers", "a place where you have to wear a diaper" (this one is irony but shows how absurd the name is) and so on... --Valor Naram (talk) 13:15, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
Re: "isolated dispensing/disposal sites for diapers essentially don't exist" -> but there do exist changing tables where diapers (nappies) are being dispensed as mentioned in #changing table in shop. If the main tag was simply "diaper" or "nappy", such namespacing would be confusing: disregarding the exact tagging, imagine something like diaper:diaper=yes, diaper:vending:diaper=yes, diaper:vending=diaper, diaper:dispensing=diaper, diaper:features=diaper, etc. See the other optional tags section for features that we could map which wouldn't make sense if namespaced under diaper: diaper:features=pad (the changing table is padded and not the diapers), diaper:features=straps (the changing table has straps, not the diapers being vended), diaper:capacity=8 (there are 8 changing tables, not 8 diapers stocked) etc. -Bkil (talk) 00:25, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Not quite. Looking at the mailing list, I see comments that indicate that the commenters are not really in contact with diapers. If you have children and/or are a person needing diapers there is no way to misunderstand this. Now the argument could be that the tag should also usable for people who are not "affected" by the tag. But imho I guess you will need to read a lot of documentation anyhow because most tags are not self explaining. Putting all this aside: changing_table is too limited as there are many other settings for changing diapers. If a change it should become something like diaper_changing_location. --Morray (talk) 05:16, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
The sad fact is: the demographics of mappers and wiki editors is skewed towards young males, possibly without children. Handling the majority as outgroup is not a proper argument. After we agree on a common tagging scheme that can feasibly represent various options, we can create editor presets that can be described with keywords, headlines and description of your desire. It is good practice to create tags to be self-explanatory in their respective context - it is expected that one looking at a toilet node will be able to tell from its tags all needed information. Could you please clarify what other settings we need to address? --Bkil (talk) 09:43, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Closing this for not providing any other good reason why we shouldn't replace the key `diaper` --Valor Naram (talk) 19:47, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Statement from the author

This discussion part is meant for listing all answers by me.

  • "changing_table:vending/dispensing" won't be implemented in this proposal in order to make it not to complicated. Vending and dispensing have also its own topic. You can buy/get thinks needed for changing the nappy of the baby but it isn't related to the possibility to aktually change nappies. Please consider extending the key described at by just editing its wiki page or even better by a proposal. Valor Naram (talk) 06:16, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Some users said this proposal were overcomplicated. In order to solve these concerns out I've made the suggestion to split up the resulting wiki page in at least two parts. The first part will simply compare the old tagging with the new one so mappers can easily switch from the Key:diaper to Key:changing_table . The second one will explain the additional tagging which is fully optional to achieve. Mappers can decide on their own, if they want to tag it or not.
  • The name of the key "changing table" cannot be misunderstood. The definition for "changing table": "A changing table is a small raised platform designed to allow a person to change someone's diaper." Source:
    Similar definitions can be found on other dictionary sites.
  • Datasets containing the old data won't be deleted. There will be a transition period in which we have to consider how to treat the old key "diaper" and how to replace it with the new key.

what happens to the old data?

What do you plan to do with the old data? If your point that the tag taking used by several thousand people (!) atm is so confusing you have to trash all this data. Or are you planning some kind of rechecking campaign? I think losing this data is not acceptable! --Morray (talk) 07:42, 1 May 2019 (UTC) Morray (talk) 07:42, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

I agree losing this data is not acceptable. Overwriting the old data via bot is also not an option because we cannot know how mappers use the key because some work with taginfo only and therefore there's the possibility of wrong use. That's why we need a transition period in which we negotiate how to correct the old data. Rechecking is also a reasonable consideration to take. I will work together with the community and I'm optimistic that we will find an appropriate solution. --Valor Naram (talk) 09:21, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
Maybe I missed something. Where "trash all this data" was proposed? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:35, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
Again! No data will be deleted --Valor Naram (talk) 17:56, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I agree that previous data should be preserved. Furthermore, I think we may decide to convert some of the clear-cut cases (like diaper=yes to changing_table=yes), although this can be done manually with Overpass Turbo and JOSM, although I'd probably double check the input first (to only convert nodes where no other diaper:*=* tag combination was present). Bkil (talk) 19:13, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Default values for changing_table:fee and changing_table:access

[...] do we assume some values when the keys changing_table:fee=* or changing_table:access=* are missing? --Skorbut (talk) 05:44, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

I think we should assume a default value similar to how fee=* and access=* is interpreted, i.e., it is free and access is not restricted. The same should be assumed for toilets as well. If a fee is needed to use toilet or an access restriction is in order, (like access=customers), I always mark it as such. 19:09, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Description of changing_table:features=*

[...] I miss the descriptions for the values of the key changing_table:features=* [...] --Skorbut (talk) 05:44, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Feel free to improve my texts below. Bkil (talk) 19:47, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
  • bench: a bench is present
  • shelf: shelves are available preferably integrated into the table in reaching distance
  • potty: a chamber pot is available
  • pillow: a pillow is integrated into the table or available to place behind the head of the baby
  • pad: a (solf) pad is placed behind the back of the baby (the difference between a mat and a pad is that a mat is thinner, more rugged and more about surface protection, while a pad is thicker, softer, more about shock absorbing and comfort - a non native speaker)
  • straps: straps can be used to immobilize and stabilize the baby against falling
  • tilting: the angle of the changing table against the ground can be adjusted
  • adjustable_height: the height of the table can be adjusted