Render amenity=animal_shelter

[ghost]

The symbol could be the same as the dog park, in brown

[imagico]

3800 uses

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Danimal_shelter

[jeisenbe]

Usage has been increasing steadily since hitting 1000 in 2016: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/?key=amenity&value=animal_shelter#chronology

Usage is widespread:

This was approved back in 2012, along with animal_boarding (see request to add that feature in #3966) and animal_breeding.

[ghost]

3800 uses

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Danimal_shelter

And? In many cases, like this one, the uses do not reveal anything, there is simply not this type of amenity in all cities, but it deserves rendering as it is a unique installation...

[imagico]

Sorry for the brevity - this was just providing data for future reference.

[jeisenbe]

@Ivans-Git while there is no minimum number required for rendering, we are more likely to add a tag which has been used thousands of times, instead of a tag used hundreds of times, since the more frequently-used tags are likely to be more significant to mappers and map users.

I also posted the charts showing geographical distribution of use and how the usage has increased over time, because we want to add features which are used widely around the globe and which are increasing steadily in usage (rather than having been added all at once in one or two organized activities such as an import) - both of these are signs that a tag has obtained consensus as the common way to tag a particular feature.

[polarbearing]

As for the rendering style, yes the dog paw would be suitable, but there should be an element for the shelter/boarding. I could imagine a roof symbol like ^ above the paw. Breeding would be different however.

[Khomille]

Something like this?

[michalpu143]

Something like this?

Looks good

[mutipg]

What you think about icon from Wiki? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=animal%20shelter?uselang=pl#Rendering for adoption shelters:

for release in nature shelters:

[polarbearing]

@mutipg - sorry that is too detailed for this style. Icons need to be 14 pixels square. And I don't think there is a need to distinguish different shelter types.

What do people think about the draft by @Khomille ? If that finds acceptance I'd prepare that as SVG.

[mutipg]

Thank you for your answer. I didn't know that icons have to be so small. IMO the draft by @Khomille looks fine for me.

[Khomille]

The roof of the shelter may be a bit too thick, I don't know.

I've made three versions that you can find here as SVG : https://github.com/Khomille/osm-animal-shelter-icon

Thin:

Medium:

Bold:

[mutipg]

The thin one looks the best for me.

[Khomille]

Usage is still increasing since the opening of this discussion, and amenity=animal_shelter is now used 4670 times. If everyone is ok, we can maybe move forward in the process?

[polarbearing]

The thin one from @Khomille looks best for me, too. Should be brown for amenity.

[polarbearing]

@imagico - what blocks this issue?

[imagico]

Nothing blocks this issue, it is open, arguments for or against rendering this are welcome as is discussion how rendering this tag could be implemented. Keep in mind however that:

• static POI rendering additions without solving the fundamental issues we have with POI rendering (#3635, #3880) are seen very critically by many of the maintainers because they are not sustainable.
• the actual meaning of amenity=animal_shelter on a global level is much beyond what the wiki documents - it is essentially used for all kind of human made structures used to shelter animals - like pens, stables or doghouses. That should be taken into account when contemplating design ideas.

Given that structures for carnivores could well account for less than half of the features tagged amenity=animal_shelter the use of a paw symbol is fairly questionable - not even considering that it is a very indirect way and therefore not very intuitive to refer to carnivores specifically.

[wmisener]

@imagico What is your evidence for the "actual meaning on a global level" of animal shelter? Poking around on overpass, I see that most uses appear to be as I expect: places that offer shelter, care, and rehabilitation for animals, typically dogs and cats (the most common tags of animal_shelter=* according to taginfo). So, I'm not sure what the evidence is that "less than half" of the features refer to carnivores, though if you have some good examples I think they'd be useful. Even if some uses refer to shelters specializing in other household pets or livestock, I think the paw symbol would be comprehensible to a user for these 'non-pawed' types of animals as well, as it is already used in the carto style for veterinarians which treat all types of animals. I therefore support the symbols posted by @Khomille.

I will say there appear to be some misuses in the database: a number of nodes labeled 'Parc de vaccination' in Burkina Faso that are possibly better tagged as veterinaries, as they appear to be for vaccinating livestock, for example. But I am not sure of the details of these facilities, and they appear to have all been added by one user. I don't think this anomalous usage should be enough to prevent rendering a fairly common type of amenity, and the symbol can help provide feedback to users.

[imagico]

My assessment of the de facto meaning of the tag as given in https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4260#issuecomment-1033161440 is from an analysis of the data. Below a few examples of uses of the tag that clearly do not fit into the claimed meaning on the wiki. Evidently there are tons of uses that are not possible to assess properly without on the ground knowledge. However you can make some assumptions based on lifestyle and cultural habits in various parts of the world (and while being mindful of the fact that the urban European/North American view that animals=pets and pets=carnivores) is not shared widely elsewhere in the world:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/456992323 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/456992324 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/451929058 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/965956504 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/803370829 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/571956996 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/428727682 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/517427812 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/771865173 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/256508928 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/746546599 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/519578168 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/110559827 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/772994406 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/737214611 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5856187320

This is evidently just a small excerpt from a look over the data world wide.

It is beyond doubt for me that the idea that amenity=animal_shelter is not significantly used beyond the narrow documented use for managed facilities taking active care of abandoned pets or injured wild animals is not sustainable in light of the data and given that the other uses of the tag in real life prevalence probably outnumber the use advertised by the wiki by several orders of magnitude it seems unlikely that these broader applications of the tag for human made structures created and used to shelter animals in general can be eliminated, in particular also since nothing except the wiki indicates that this would be in any way desirable.

And as i said elsewhere - do not make the mistake to project your personal view what is intuitive to you with your (likely European or North American urban cultural background) onto our target map users in general.

[Hufkratzer]

Perhaps better some icon where you don't see the paws and can't identify the type of animal, some mixture between:

https://ideditor.github.io/temaki/docs/#icon-temaki-dog_shelter and https://ideditor.github.io/temaki/docs/#icon-temaki-horse_shelter

[imagico]

Yes, and it could be worth trying if such a concept could work also in combination with our base design for shelter/hut symbols.

[wmisener]

I still disagree that a paw icon would be unrecognizable for users, even if you want to endorse the broadening of the meaning of this tag beyond the wiki definition/think "the data" has already done so (which is understandable, as I acknowledge the tag is vaguely named if you're not familiar with the concept). The paw icon is already used in the only three animal-related icons carto renders, as far as I can tell: leisure=dog_park, shop=pet, and amenity=veterinary. Neither of the latter two POIs is specifically for small carnivores often kept as pets in the West, and I speculate that many uses of both shop=pet and amenity=veterinary are related to e.g. livestock or other pets like rodents, birds, or reptiles. So I think carto has already adopted the paw icon as meaning animals in general, or at least domestic ones. As far as I know, there haven't been any issues with this, though correct me if I'm wrong. In my opinion, adding a new (vaguely animal-shaped) icon denoting animals for this tag dilutes the cartographic consistency of the style, and will only be confusing to users who also see these other icons. So I really think sticking with the paw iconography, and combining it with the shelter/roof as has already been done in this thread, is the way to go here.

[imagico]

Again - as i said previously several times - past bad decisions are neither a good reason nor an excuse to perpetuate bad design or cultural imperialism. I have pointed out a long time ago (in #3635) that a lot of the symbols we have added in an inflationary manner to this style over the years are poor choices considering the mission and the goals of this project.

And i am not endorsing a broadening of the meaning of this tag - that would imply that it at some point in the past had a more narrow meaning or that the wiki is somehow authoritative in defining what the meaning of a tag is. It is doubtful that this tag ever had a de facto meaning in practical use as narrow as the wiki says. What i am saying is that when we consider rendering a certain tag we need to take into account primarily how the tag is de facto used when contemplating design questions.

[nc011]

Again - as i said previously several times - past bad decisions are neither a good reason nor an excuse to perpetuate bad design or cultural imperialism. I have pointed out a long time ago (in #3635) that a lot of the symbols we have added in an inflationary manner to this style over the years are poor choices considering the mission and the goals of this project.

I think the paw symbol is fine to denote a pet-related POI. By a significant margin, dogs are the most common pet globally, followed by cats. Obviously, numbers vary by source and country (some example sources: 1,2,3) but it seems pretty clear that a paw should easily be recognisable as a pet symbol across many countries (not just Europe or North America).

And i am not endorsing a broadening of the meaning of this tag - that would imply that it at some point in the past had a more narrow meaning or that the wiki is somehow authoritative in defining what the meaning of a tag is. It is doubtful that this tag ever had a de facto meaning in practical use as narrow as the wiki says. What i am saying is that when we consider rendering a certain tag we need to take into account primarily how the tag is de facto used when contemplating design questions.

I haven't seen any statistical evidence on the usage of this tag in terms of the "intended" (i.e. Wiki/OSM accepted proposal) vs "in use" meaning - or how this may have varied over time. It's almost certainly impossible to do in a thorough way (seeing as, often, secondary tags that would clarify the usage aren't added).

However, the proposed hut/roof over a paw icon would still work for both the "intended" and the other "in use" cases that have been identified. The icon would still just be a symbol for a place of shelter for animals.