search

streetcomplete / StreetComplete

Easy to use OpenStreetMap editor for Android
https://streetcomplete.app
GNU General Public License v3.0
3.9k stars 355 forks source link

Quest suggestion: Unisex hairdressers #4829

Closed FloEdelmann closed 1 year ago

FloEdelmann commented 1 year ago

General

Affected tag(s) to be modified/added: unisex=yes or female=yes or male=yes (for shop=hairdresser) Question asked: Which customers does this hairdresser serve?

Checklist

Checklist for quest suggestions (see guidelines):

Ideas for implementation

Element selection:

nodes with
  shop = hairdresser
  and !unisex and !female and !male

Or, to cover edge cases like this one I discovered:

nodes with
  shop = hairdresser
  and unisex != yes and female != yes and male != yes

In this case, should the respective other existing keys should be deleted, in addition to setting unisex=yes / female=yes / male=yes? Or should the unusual only value also be considered valid?

Metadata needed: None.

Proposed UI: Simple text selection: "All genders" / "Women only" / "Men only"

Discostu36 commented 1 year ago

unisex=yes is not the same as male=yes and female=yes, is it?

Discostu36 commented 1 year ago

I think there needs to be a "Woman and men are segregated" option, leading to male=yes, female=yes, unisex=no.

FloEdelmann commented 1 year ago

In iD, it is rendered as "Both genders", and only one of the three choices is allowed:

grafik

The wiki page for unisex comments on the distinction of unisex=yes and female=yes+male=yes, but focuses on toilets. I doubt that there are unisex hairdressers that have segregated areas for men and women.

Discostu36 commented 1 year ago

I doubt that there are unisex hairdressers that have segregated areas for men and women.

I'd guess this to be standard in countries with muslim majority, but don't have first hand experience about that.

FloEdelmann commented 1 year ago

Most uses of female=yes+male=yes are in Central Europe, so I guess we can't draw a conclusion about gender segregation from the use of female=yes+male=yes vs. unisex=yes: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1rx1

But unisex=yes is much more popular, so I think this quest should prefer it.

I've also updated the Overpass Query in the original post to show female=yes+male=yes differently: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1rx0

mnalis commented 1 year ago

I have some doubts about ":chipmunk: Easily answerable by any pedestrian from the outside but a survey is necessary". Sometimes it is explicitly spelled on the outside in Croatia, but sometimes it is not.

Perhaps as disabled by default quest, as it might need entering and asking the staff?

rhhsm commented 1 year ago

Good idea!

I have some doubts about "🐿️ Easily answerable by any pedestrian from the outside but a survey is necessary". Sometimes it is explicitly spelled on the outside in Croatia, but sometimes it is not.

Perhaps as disabled by default quest, as it might need entering and asking the staff?

I think it is safe to assume that if it's not shown on the outside, it's unisex. If I were a male/female only hairdresser, I would put that info on the window to avoid having to refuse customers of the wrong gender all the time.

I doubt that there are unisex hairdressers that have segregated areas for men and women.

I'd guess this to be standard in countries with muslim majority, but don't have first hand experience about that.

I lived in Turkey for a year, and never saw unisex hairdressers. All were either male or female, and this is clearly indicated on the window. It might be a good idea to give local language translations of male/female in the quest, similar to how the days of the week are given in the local language for the opening hours quest.

mnalis commented 1 year ago

unisex=yes is not the same as male=yes and female=yes, is it?

It seems to be contested. It might be best to always remove unisex=* key and replace it with male=* + female=* for clarity.

I think it is safe to assume that if it's not shown on the outside, it's unisex

I really wouldn't know, but if it is really so, it should be said in quest description, e.g. if there is no signage on the outside, mark it is as male+female

If I were a male/female only hairdresser, I would put that info on the window to avoid having to refuse customers of the wrong gender all the time.

Well, yeah, don't get me started on "If I were..." talk :smile: - there are zillion things I'm amazed that are so counterintuitive, bad for your profits/health/wellbeing/environment and just plain wrong; and people still do it all the time against all logic. So, I definitely would not take "it is only logical" argument as any basis for making a model of reality (if anything, I'd tend to assume that if it is logical, majority of the people are probably not doing it, but that might be a just a little too cynical)

rhhsm commented 1 year ago

I think it is safe to assume that if it's not shown on the outside, it's unisex

I really wouldn't know, but if it is really so, it should be said in quest description, e.g. if there is no signage on the outside, mark it is as male+female

It would be best to mark it as not shown, like name:signed=no for shops that have no visible name.

Discostu36 commented 1 year ago

It might be best to always remove unisex=* key and replace it with male=* + female=* for clarity.

But it does mean two different things, even if there is no segregation. Unisex also includes people who don't identify as male or female.

westnordost commented 1 year ago

In iD, it is rendered as "Both genders", and only one of the three choices is allowed

This is somewhat of a misinterpretation by iD and subsequent pushing of this meaning by iD. It really should be a bug report over there and be fixed. Although, by this time unisex as a tag has pretty much been burnt already since this misinterpretation has been around now for so long. I remember there was a discussion about this already (with this conclusion, amongst other things), not sure whether on the mailing list or in the forum.

Anyway, unisex should not be used by StreetComplete because it is (now) quite ambiguous. If we really want to tag toilets, hairdressers, baths etc. that have separate areas for women and men, I fear a new tag would need to be invented for that or something (e.g. segregated_by_sex or something).

westnordost commented 1 year ago

It would be best to mark it as not shown, like name:signed=no for shops that have no visible name.

How though? This involves several tags, so something like sex:signed=no is not possible.

matkoniecz commented 1 year ago

This is somewhat of a misinterpretation by iD and subsequent pushing of this meaning by iD. It really should be a bug report over there and be fixed. Although, by this time unisex as a tag has pretty much been burnt already since this misinterpretation has been around now for so long. I remember there was a discussion about this already (with this conclusion, amongst other things), not sure whether on the mailing list or in the forum.

Yes, the general problem is that unisex tag is skunked term as far as OSM tagging is concerned and there is no replacement.

And StreetComplete is not supposed to be introducing completely new tags on its own without agreement from OSM community.

Although, by this time unisex as a tag has pretty much been burnt already since this misinterpretation has been around now for so long. I remember there was a discussion about this already (with this conclusion, amongst other things), not sure whether on the mailing list or in the forum.

On both :)

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2018-April/thread.html#80559 https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=717805

letypequividelespoubelles commented 1 year ago

I doubt that there are unisex hairdressers that have segregated areas for men and women.

photo_2023-02-21_08-16-07

Seen in Delhi, India.

rhhsm commented 1 year ago

I doubt that there are unisex hairdressers that have segregated areas for men and women.

Seen in Delhi, India.

Those are two hairdressers next door to each other :) I'd map them separately

Discostu36 commented 1 year ago

Those are two hairdressers next door to each other :) I'd map them separately

So in every country with gender segregation, every hairdresser who serves both sexes has to be mapped twice? I don't find that a good solution.

rhhsm commented 1 year ago

Those are two hairdressers next door to each other :) I'd map them separately

So in every country with gender segregation, every hairdresser who serves both sexes has to be mapped twice? I don't find that a good solution.

No. In this particular example, each shop has its own entrance.

Discostu36 commented 1 year ago

I'd suspect this to be the standard case.

FloEdelmann commented 1 year ago

Okay, so if we consider the unisex tag as "burnt", the discussion about gender segregation is pointless, as we could only tag female=yes+male=yes or female=yes(+ maybe male=no) or male=yes (+ maybe female=no).

Should I open a new quest suggestion issue using only those tags to keep the discussion easy to follow?

westnordost commented 1 year ago

Would be better

Am 21. Februar 2023 10:58:19 MEZ schrieb Flo Edelmann @.***>:

Okay, so if we consider the unisex tag as "burnt", the discussion about gender segregation is pointless, as we could only tag female=yes+male=yes or female=yes(+ maybe male=no) or male=yes (+ maybe female=no).

Should I open a new quest suggestion issue using only those tags to keep the discussion easy to follow?

-- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/4829#issuecomment-1438185337 You are receiving this because you commented.

Message ID: @.***> -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.

FloEdelmann commented 1 year ago

I created a follow-up suggestion issue: #4833