Add fields for attraction=animal

[maro-21]

Add fields barrier= and species= for attraction=animal because they are commonly used with it.

attraction=animal: 13411 uses attraction=animal + barrier=: 1780 uses attraction=animal + species=: 757 uses

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/attraction=animal#combinations

[quincylvania]

Hmm using barrier on areas like this is a bit of a hack and I don't think iD should encourage it. Fences and walls can be mapped separately.

And iD already has a species:wikidata field for tagging species information, so a species field would appear redundant.

[quincylvania]

Yeah I don't see us adding either of these, sorry!

[maro-21]

Ok, perhaps barrier is not a good idea. It is probably used in zoos where animals are tagged as an area and barrier is added to save time without adding another feature with the same geometry.

species:wikidata is just a "link" to wikidata species= is a tag to write a latin name for species

And I think we need species, to add species:wikidata, like we need brand to add brand:wikidata and they are not the same. species is for human beings while species:wikidata is for computers...

Looks like we're not using the key species= anywhere in iD! Neither with animals nor with plants. But it is used over 1 million times! https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:species

[bhousel]

species is for human beings while species:wikidata is for computers... Looks like we're not using the key species= anywhere in iD! Neither with animals nor with plants. But it is used over 1 million times!

I don't really agree that "species is for human beings".. It's not a very easy-to-understand tag.

Some of what follows is my thinking, and it goes back years, and doesn't really matter anymore since I am not deciding things on iD. But it might be helpful to explain why things are the way they are.

I traditionally avoided adding fields for things like species and genus to iD because most casual mappers are not really able to fill these in, and advanced mappers or botanists can use the raw tag editor for this. There is some discussion on #4240 about it. I would rather not introduce a field if it is likely to confuse people.. Worst case, people actually start using the field enthusiastically and fill it with wrong data.

Also, I don't think tag usage count is a very good metric for whether something should be included as a field. We should be optimizing for user experience, and particularly for users who are new to mapping, or casually interested in OpenStreetMap. Many tags have inflated usage because of imports or other campaigns, and that doesn't make them good tags.

Adding too many fields and presets works against this goal of being a friendly editor for new users because:

• all those things take up space in the UI and cause cognitive load.. (I have seen new users get frustrated trying to fill in everything in the sidebar).
• all those things really should be localized/translated for users of different abilities everywhere..

[quincylvania]

I agree with Bryan here.

The Species Wikidata field is much simpler than would be a species field since users can just type the name of the thing in their local language. Data consumers can use the Wikidata API to get nice labels and linked attributes.