I am a member of ICOM. ICOM members get free admission to many museums worldwide. I would like to tag this, as there is no list of all museums that grant free admission.
My first thought was to realize this with fee:conditional = no @ ICOM-Member.
This thread has made me think twice. In the Netherlands there is apparently a card that grants free admission to museums, but it is mostly tagged as payment:museumkaart=yes. This solution seems strange to me, since a membership is not a payment method, but no payment is required.
But you do pay with the Museumkaart; just not for each individual visit. Instead a yearly flat fee is charged. It is not a membership, rather a subscription.
Don’t use conditionals for this; there can be many payment methods, and doing that will either hijack fee:conditional for one specific method, or lead to a really complex compound value.
I see. This is a huge difference to an ICOM membership. ICOM is an organization of museum professionals. The free entry to museums is not the main purpose, but something like a side-effect.
No, I never planned so change the tagging of the Museumkaart. I’m just looking for the proper way to tag the free visit for ICOM members.
Isn’t fee:conditional a really complex compound value anyways? Talking about museums you can have retired persons, seniors, military personal, children (depending on age), students (sometimes up to a certain age), students, residents, teachers etc.
My first thought was to realize this with fee:conditional = no @ ICOM-Member.
I agree with Jeroen to not use “conditional” as the key, thinking about all the usual discounts and different options that are common around here, it seems better to focus on a specific key for the specific property you are after, i.e. something like
fee:icom_member=no
see for example here for a list of discounts at cultural sites available on the national level: https://cultura.gov.it/agevolazioni (ICOM is listed, among a lot of others)
Thank you for your input. So I won’t usefee:conditional = no @ ICOM-Member.
This looks quite fine. Can I just start using a new tag like fee:icom_member=no?
This doesn’t seem to fit. It would look to me like the tagged museum itself were an ICOM member, not the museum grants free admission for ICOM members.
By default, OSM doesn’t care about the “membership” of facilities and organizations. That work belongs to Wikidata etc. This should not be misinterpreted.
There’s no problem with using fee:conditional=no @ ("ICOM member") initially or together at first. *:conditional= is extensible, and comments should be supported.
It won’t be scalable to have many fee:*_member= for every external scheme out there. As membership= already exists, its acceptance could be eg membership:icom= , so that could be used in fee:membership:icom=no (as a modal suffix) / membership:icom:fee=no (as a namespace, because the context is clear it doesn’t mean fees for becoming ICOM member here) if needed. Stripping it down to the most barebones fee:icom=no may also be acceptable, considering its prominence.
But personally, I’m wondering whether it’s needed to list out every perk of such members, eg priority entry to skip queues, or reserved spots when tickets are sold out or fully booked. membership:icom= could be enough to let your find out. Another complication is ICOM is not always free, but can be discounts, or allowing to pay at other prices (eg group). The former would depend on how the discount:*= proposal works out. The latter has no solution I know now. Considering membership:icom= has somewhat different implication from membership= , it may be acceptable to start with membership:icom=fee to show it replaces the fees for simplicity.
There are even more complexities. Eg reservations may be required to use your ICOM price, and the number of guests you can bring along. Not to mention permanent vs special exhibitions.
Others can refer to such national lists for the variations
But personally, I’m wondering whether it’s needed to list out every perk of such members, when membership:icom= could be enough to let your know.
I don’t like “membership:icom” for the reason mentioned above: it seems to suggest the place is an icom member, but the OP asked for people that are members.