From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I think this is a really bad idea. There is a huge difference between a bicycle rental place and one that rents clothes. OSM in general has worked better with specific tags than with a generic tag and additional tags to identify what the place actually is. One reason is that it's easier for mappers to guess what the tag might be; the second is that using generic tags imposes a large burden on data consumers who now have to filter out lots of stuff which is not of interest to them when previously they could just collect a specific tag. Additionally it goes against the major precedents: car rental & bicycle rental.

I am not against separating product and service business within the shop key (in fact I suggested just such a set of categories 5 years ago), but shop=rental, like shop=trade is too generic. SK53 (talk) 14:35, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

So how would you tag a rental which offers atv:rental, snowmobile:rental, motorcycle:rental and sailboard:rental ? rtfm Rtfm (talk) 21:29, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm looking for a way to map a Rent-a-Center (, which rents-to-own; appliances, furniture, electronic and more. We also have some local businesses who rent the same, plus; heavy machinery, trailers, tents, tables, chairs, bounce-houses, nearly anything.... Seeing shop=rental I thought that was a good starting place, but then I read the controversy surrounding its vague nature. Any suggestions on how I should proceed? --TreeStryder (talk) 15:27, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

If there's no better way proposed (but just a "this won't work" / "we've always done it the conservative way"),
I don't consider to call it a controversy, see wikipedia:Controversy#Benford's_law.
A namespace is a well established way to express details in OSM, so just read Any_tags_you_like and then decide what to tag.
Don't let the naysayers avoid any progress. Feel free to contact me directly. Cheers Rtfm Rtfm (talk) 19:43, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Been trying to add an electric disabled wheelchair rental facility - hard work! Methinks that rental is an amenity that needs a listing mechanism for all the types of device/clothing etc. Min/Max period of hire is also required. Think that shop is not quite right. --TonyS (talk) 18:03, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

A Shopmobility place? I'm wanting to tag one of these too. There's 5 instances of amenity=mobility_equipment_hire in the UK, although the tag is undocumented (eg You might want to try asking at or on the tagging list ( --Lakedistrict (talk) 19:28, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

canoe:rental vs rental:canoe

Is there some reason to prefer first form? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:36, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

It's a question of "grammar" (subject, object and so on), check Namespace_tag_overview for some syntax examples rtfm Rtfm (talk) 17:19, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Shop=rental VS rental=*

For anyone interested there is a rental=* tag that has been used for as long as this one and has almost three times the usage. Although, a couple of times RTFM did mass edits to it in an attempt to transfer over all the usages to his un-discussed whatever:rental namespace schemes, but it seems like rental=* has mostly recovered and is still on an upward trajectory. My recommendation is to just go with that by tagging the object as whatever type of shop it is and then just adding rental=whatever to it. If the shop rents multiple items, just use a colon and add multiple values. Which is must easier and less convoluted then his namespace thing. Plus, it already has three times the usage behind it then the namespaces do. Despite RTFM screwing with tags to artificially make his scheme seem legitimate. Also, that way it won't turn the existing rental shops that are tagged normally into generic ones, that aren't supported by anything because they use a bunch of obscure, un-supported tags. That will never get community approval or be supported anywhere. Finally, I think the usage of this tag should be discouraged for the reasons I stated and rental=* should be encouraged instead. Or at least rental=* should be added to shop=rental to specify what it rents. Instead of using the convoluted *:rental scheme. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:05, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Page protection

I protected the page, because I considered recent editing patterns disruptive. I would suggest that if one of your wiki edits is undone and you do not understand the reasoning, you initiate a discussion on the talk page with the primary aim to understand the other's position. --Tigerfell This user is member of the wiki team of OSM (Let's talk) 11:43, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tigerfell. I had initiated a discussion on Rtfm's talk page, but he refused to respond to it. If a person is unwilling to participate in discussion and fails to reasonably justify why they undid an edit in the changeset comments or elsewhere, especially if they resort to personal attacks instead as Rtfm did, I think reverting them is completely warranted. Otherwise, people will just get their way by default if they refuse to discuss things. Anyway, at least in this case it was dealt with. Even if Rtfm didn't do his part to resolve it. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:32, 27 January 2020 (UTC)