Proposal talk:Luggage locker (2017)

Yes for amenity=locker, no for amenity=luggage_locker

I don't see any difference between the two besides their size. As described in your two proposals, amenity=luggage_locker would permits the storage of larger items (luggage) and amenity=locker would be designed to host smaller items. This seems redundant to me. Actually, a lot of lockers I came across offers different sizes in the same location, a few for luggage and the rest for purses, in which case both tags should be employed on two separate nodes. Not very practical. I think it'll be much easier and clearer to have only one tag amenity=locker. The size of the locker can be described by other tags, not the amenity one. Freayd (talk) 09:26, 19 July 2017‎ (UTC)

Perhaps the name by itself is wrong. Locker sounds like its from a gym or highschool. amenity=luggage_storage might be more descriptive (assuming we are talking about storage lockers in a public transport setting (or similar, like a mall or amusement park)) --EnturJohanWiklund (talk) 15:40, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

I think using the more general term "locker" can fit more use cases than just luggage locker. It might never be used, but if several type of lockers happen to be distinguished, then we could use the key locker (eg. locker=luggage) to describe what is being stored. Anyway, amenity=luggage_locker is probably good enough. My main point is to have only one amenity tag (either locker or luggage_locker) and to describe different sizes or content with other tags. Two amenity tags are likely to create confusion and misusage. Freayd (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes for amenity=luggage_storage, no for amenity=luggage_locker|locker

I think that amenity=luggage_storage should be accepted, because it is definitely more general, descriptive and fits all cases.

All I want - to left luggage. Room or boxes will be the last thing I'm intrested while searching. Because sometimes you can find only person operated rooms for luggage (in Russia lockers are not very popular). If you want you may use additional tag like luggage_storage = room/locker/whatelse. Next popular is amenity=left_luggage and this should be accepted VlIvYur (talk) 23:05, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

I half-agree with you, as in the potential that both can be adopted. A storage-space tag should be used for the facility/service amenity (including both attended/automated counters, and self-drop free space); a locker tag should be used for lockers themselves. It is possible for a place to offer all 3. -- Kovposch (talk) 05:05, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Seriously?

@Dieter: You are proposing this and Proposed_features/Locker both at the same time? Are you serious? Please remove (or obsolete) one of the two (preferably this one) and propose only the one that you prefer. --Fkv (talk) 03:46, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Another idea

How about this?

amenity=storage
storage=luggage_locker
fee=yes
opening_hours=...
self_service=yes/no/only

amenity=luggage_storage

I agree with the remarks made by VlIvYur. amenity=luggage_storage has, in my perspective, the right functional granularity: A place where you can store your luggage. amenity=luggage_storage can apply to luggage lockers, but also to a luggage room in a hotel, or a commercial luggage depot (seen in bigger cities nearby train stations). Tagging luggage storage facilities would be incredibly useful for travelers. I'm in favour of formalizing the tag. Ilcuoco57 (talk) 10:31, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

The problem with putting an amenity=luggage_story in a hotel is that they aren't usually separate businesses. Rather, you deposit your luggage at the reception. So a combination of tourism=hotel with luggage_storage=yes would likely make more sense there -- Taktaal (talk) 22:41, 17 November 2023 (UTC)