Talk:Proposed features/petting zoo

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Wouldn't it be better to have tourism=zoo,zootype=petting ? zootype could default to regular or similar to keep with the existing tag, but they are both zoos, just different sub-types Delta foxtrot2 10:00, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Delta Foxtrot 2's suggestion - the tag:amenity=restaurant and tag:amenity=fast_food tags are excellent examples. --DiverCTH 17:56, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Please feel free to update this code, but here's a more hierarchical method that might work:

tag:zoo={Traditional, Safari (driving), Petting, [undefined]} default:[undefined]

then specify the types of attractions in the Comments field.

--DiverCTH 19:33, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree that it would be a nice structure. However, as I wrote in the proposal as well, petting zoos are usually not aimed at tourists at all (at least here in NL). For me it would be strange to group it under the tourism=* tag. --Sybren 07:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I can see the merits of both methods. My concern is with how the tag would be used globally regardless of country.

In the US, most petting zoos are temporary structures that are associated with traveling attractions such as traveling circuses, state/county fairs, corporate picnics, and various festivals. It's also common for the more established festivals/fairs/etc... to use the same map at the same location each year, and would be useful to map in OSM. (Can anyone in the UK or Canada give a similar situation?)

Take the Minnesota Renaissance Festival as an example. The festival has been at the same location with the same map for over a decade. It is a popular regional tourist attraction, and a cheap leisure activity for local residents. The children's area contains a petting zoo, which we'll assume keeps the same animals and layout for several years.

In this example, the festival is both a tourist attraction and a leisure activity, the zoo area could be considered under either the Tourism=* or the Leisure=* hierarchy.

Another theoretical example might be a year-round petting zoo that is run by a small university as part of an agriculture course. The university itself is tagged as amenity=university. The zoo is typically visited groups of local elementary schoolchildren as either elementary school trips. During the summer holiday, it is also visited by local families with small children. In this example, the zoo is part of the university, and is mostly used for educational purposes (amenity=* hierarchy). It is used for leisure (leisure=* hierarchy), but only occasionally, and is never a tourist attraction.

As a final thought, we need to consider the KISS principle when it comes to both editing the map and rendering it. Since tourism=zoo tag already exists, wouldn't it be simpler to extend that tag then to create an entirely new one? There will always be situations where a tag can be considered under multiple hierarchies (see the voting on the amenity=university tag).

--DiverCTH 03:55, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Let's go for the KISS principle and use tourism=zoo. Do we want to use zootype=petting to specify a petting zoo? Or something else? I'm fine by using zootype=*

--sybren 08:23, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

What about petting zoos/areas within larger zoos? sadam 13:13, 27 August 2009 (UTC)