Proposal:Virtual tour
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Note: The
For full template documentation see Template:Vote. See also how vote outcome is processed.
| Virtual tour | |
|---|---|
| Proposal status: | Canceled (inactive) |
| Proposed by: | BrechtD |
| Tagging: | virtual_tour=* |
| Applies to: |    
|
| Definition: | URL to a virtual tour page, for example panoramic virtual tours, 360° tours, 3D tours, immersive experiences, digital twins, VR-based tours, Virtual Reality experiences or augmented reality tour |
| Statistics: |
|
| Rendered as: | Not shown on map. |
| Draft started: | 2024-10-31 |
| RFC start: | 2024-11-01 |
| Vote start: | 2024-11-14 |
| Vote end: | 2024-11-28 |
Proposal
More and more facilities create for example 3D images where you can walk through the building/place, so you get an impression of how the place looks like.
The areas of application are: museums, hotels, restaurants, hospitals, (clothing) stores, tourism, industry, real estate...
The proposed tag would be applicable to the following database elements:
- Nodes: tourism=* amenity=* shop=* building=*
- Way: tourism=artwork
- Areas: tourism=* amenity=* shop=* building=*
- Relations: route=bicycle route=foot route=hiking route=horse route=inline_skates route=mtb route=running route=piste for example a trail
Rationale
Many places provide a virtual tour online.The tour is usually offered on the website, but a website tag does not tell the user that a virtual tour is available. The proposed tag links directly to the virtual tour.
Kinds of virtual tours
Virtual tours come in varying forms wikipedia virtual tour
Why a new tag
A new tag has the advantage of keeping it short. This would not be the case if it is put together with for example the website=* tag as a value.
Tagging
| Key | Value | Element | Discription | image |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| virtual_tour | <URL> / website |
|
A link to a virtual tour web page, for example panoramic virtual tours, 360° tours, 3D tours, immersive experiences, digital twins, VR-based tours, Virtual Reality experiences or augmented reality tour | 
|
Tag
virtual_tour=<URL>Other keys/services
- image=* - URL to an single image (use image if its ony one single static photo)
- OpenTrailView - Service to image footpaths (use the tag virtual_tour only for e.g. tourism=viewpoint, iconic track or signposted trails, in all other cases use OpenTrailView or Panoramax or Mapillary or ...)
Tagging museum example:
Examples
Some examples of virtual tours:
- 360 tour of a store
- 360 tour of a bar and restaurant
- 360 tour of a hospital
- 360 tour of the Belgium palace
- virtual tour of a museum
- panoramic mountain view
Rendering
No rendering on the map.
Features/Pages affected
Modifying existing pages
Small statement on each value page that virtual_tour=url can be used.
Value pages of Key:tourism
Value pages of Key:amenity
Value pages of Key:shop
Value pages of Key:building
Creating a new page
Key:virtual_tour
External discussions
A new post has been created in the community forum: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/proposal-of-tag-virual-tour-url/120965
Comments
Please comment on the discussion page.
references
Voting
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 |
|---|---|---|
|
{{vote|yes}} --~~~~
|
Feel free to also explain why you support proposal. |
|
{{vote|no}} reason --~~~~
|
Replace reason with your reason(s) for voting no. |
|
{{vote|abstain}} comments --~~~~
|
If you don't want to vote but have comments. Replace comments with your comments. |
~~~~ automatically inserts your name and the current date.For full template documentation see Template:Vote. See also how vote outcome is processed.
I approve this proposal. Adding virtual tours gives the benefit of allowing people to discover places in the world through images and videos. --BrechtD (talk) 01:49, 14 November 2024 (UTC)- I approve this proposal. --Jofban (talk) 09:13, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. The proposal is missing an accessibility part (for example: is the virtual tour accessible for blind people? What kind of tour is it - text-based, VR-based, …?), but this can be added as a next step. --Hypo808 (talk) 10:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC) Hey, currently virtual_tour=* can be used for all types of virtual tours. This can certainly be discussed afterwards, for example to indicate that the virtual tour is also suitable for visually impaired people by means of text. --BrechtD (talk) 17:30, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Dieterdreist (talk) 11:18, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --Paguro01 (talk) 13:16, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
I oppose this proposal. It makes no sense to "approve" this tag - it has never been used. If someone wants to use this tag they can just use it; it does not need "approval". SomeoneElse (talk) 15:15, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- SomeoneElse The tag is now in the statistics ;-) --BrechtD (talk) 18:42, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. I agree with SomeoneElse that mappers can just use the tag, no approval needed for that, but that opinion is not a good reason to oppose --Peter Elderson (talk) 22:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. In which case adding website=* is not enough? I cannot really imagine where it would be useful. Also, I hope that people will not start adding Google/Bing street side view to random roads --Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 14:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- Hey, First reason For example, a museum usually has a name=*, website=*(global website of the museum), ... so then website=* is already in use. Second reason: if website=* is used for a link to a virtual tour, a third party cannot possibly know whether this URL leads to a virtual tour or a "normal" website, this is only possible by using a different tag, namely virtual_tour=*. --BrechtD (talk) 16:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- I am also aware of this, which is why when a wiki page is created, there will also be referred to Street-level imagery services so that people know which source they can use. --BrechtD (talk) 18:23, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. Where is this going to lead? OSM is a geodatabase. There are websites for more detailed explanations of what is or is not possible at a particular location. We don't need to take over their function. Protoxenus (talk) 16:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- Protoxenus There are already many tags within OSM that refer to external sources/info and that are widely used, some examples: wikipedia=*, wikidata=*, opening_hours=*, contact:instagram=*, ... --BrechtD (talk) 19:00, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. --S8evq (talk) 19:21, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. I don't see a fundamental reason why this tag couldn't be introduced; after all, rejecting this proposal will only lead to its organic growth. However, I do believe that it's important to indicate the accessibility of the virtual tour (as others have pointed out), as well as the available languages, if different ones exist at different URLs. This could, for example, be done through virtual_tour:language=* keys. --Trainsgender (talk) 19:29, 15 November 2024 (UTC) Good tip, definitely open to further suggestions... --BrechtD (talk) 21:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. -- First off, I agree with the sentiment expressed by @SomeoneElse:. I don't see obvious problems with this key, but I think it's premature to stamp it approved. I feel that a tag should have some use over a period of time to understand how it's used by mappers and data consumers alike. Through that usage, we will discover the breadth of features that it might apply to and then better understand whether the scheme is sufficient to express the complexity of reality. Right now, we can't examine a broad range of tagged features to identify whether the tagging scheme is a good fit. We may find that a single tag with a URL is not sufficiently complex to express the breadth of virtual tour schemes. We may also discover that the tag is so rarely used that it doesn't make sense to formalize it. I also think that as a general rule that we should not encourage proposals on low-usage tags. Discuss and document new tags, if they catch on, great! A proposal is better suited for a later time in a tag's lifespan after it's come in contact with the complexities of real world, which would result in a better use of the community's time. --ZeLonewolf (talk) 16:46, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. This tag has not been used enough to warrant a formal proposal process. There's simply not enough examples for other community members to form an opinion with. Nothing is stopping you from using this tag and encouraging others to do so, but there is no reason to formalize it at the very beginning of its lifespan. --clay_c (talk) 19:00, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
- I approve this proposal. Some locations do indeed have official 360's available and seeing as we already have various links to link to menu's, booking, etc for restaurant for example, it makes sense to also be able to link this --Thibaultmol (talk) 14:34, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. Can we keep the wiki page exist for low-usage tags that don't pass the voting process? -- Rtnf (talk) 09:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose this proposal. Soft no for now. I appreciate the concept, but I suspect the focus on website URLs is already too limiting, as discussed in on the talk page. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 18:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
For the moment the proposal is canceled, because some adjustments will be made to the proposal. So you can't vote right now...