Proposal:Pet
| Access tag pet | |
|---|---|
| Proposal status: | Abandoned (inactive) |
| Proposed by: | ZeiP |
| Tagging: | pet=* |
| Applies to: |    
|
| Definition: | Allow specifying access for all pets, not just dog=*s. |
| Statistics: |
|
| Draft started: | 2018-06-10 |
| RFC start: | 2018-06-10 |
Proposal
Proposing a new tag pet=* (that is sometimes already used) for similar use as dog=*.
Rationale
In addition to dog=*s, some establishments also allow or disallow access for any pets. Currently this seems to be tagged by some as pets=*, but all the other access tags use a singular form. shop=pet also uses pet=* to specify which pets the pet store is selling; but conflicts between an access tags yes/no values and pet names should be minimal.
Examples
The Finnish Forest administration's wilderness huts allow any pets if the other visitors approve, not just dogs. Dogs are probably the most common pet in these, but also cats and other animals seem possible in at least huts relatively close to a road.
Tagging
| Tag | Description |
|---|---|
| pet=yes | Pets are allowed or the amenity is for the use of pets. |
| pet=no | Pets are not allowed |
| pet=leashed | Pets are allowed only when on a leash. |
| All other values are for shop=pet species definition only. |
Applies to
The proposed tagging applies to nodes, ways, areas and relations.
Features/Pages affected
- dog=* will stay in use
- The use in shop=pet may continue with a separate definition.
- Some users have already tagged features with pets=*; this would now become obsolete.
External discussions
Comments
Please comment on the discussion page.