This proposal defines and formalizes the values for the current in-use beauty key.
Please discuss this proposal on its wiki talk page.
why =hairdresser ? We have shop=hairdresser for hairdressers.
3 Likes
True, but combined beauty salon / hairdressers are common, at least where I live. In fact I’ve often doubted the best tagging for these.
I don’t think this proposal intends to bring all hairdressers under the beauty tag (it might be worth making that explicit though, i.e. confirm that tagging would not change for businesses where hairdressing is the only or main service). It could be useful for places that advertise themselves as beauty salons where hairdressing is just one of the services offered.
(Edited to add:)
Although that would only make sense as part of a semi colon separated list. That possibility is referred to briefly in the proposal but it seems like it would be quite common. I think it’s something that mappers are still quite reluctant to use (maybe because tools don’t really support it).
3 Likes
I wouldn’t say that massage comes under beauty?
1 Like
IIRC we’ve already had this discussion at least once before.
In any case beauty=tanning and the deprecation of leisure=tanning_studio remains just as problematic as it was back then (naturally iDs then ignoring that is what has caused the lopsided numbers). Nearly all uses of leisure=tanning_studio “here” are for fully automated provision of tanning beds, shop=beauty, beauty=tanning just doesn’t adequately capture that.
3 Likes
True. I’ve always added beauty=* to the shop=hairdresser, but strictly speaking, a hairdresser is just a very specialized type of beauty salon, so you could always argue for shop=beauty + beauty=hairdresser.
What I find disappointing about the proposal, is that it’s not trying to clarify anything, it just makes the whole fuzziness even more fuzzy. Having multiple options to tag the same thing leads to opinionated tagging. We also have things not actually belonging to beauty: aesthetic, which is actually healthcare in a lot of countries, massage not being related to beauty, and spa neither.
2 Likes
When I go to the barbers it would be very odd to consider it beauty.
2 Likes
it seems that noone complained about this in more relevant place - see is:issue tanning_studio search results
(I have no idea which tagging is better/should be used here, and my knowledge about tanning places is minimal, so I am not planning to create such issue)
I’ve wondered how to decide between tagging something as a shop=beauty beauty=aesthetic or as a healthcare amenity (e.g. clinic) with a healthcare:speciality=plastic_surgery. The Wiki descriptions of the two tags overlap. If the tag is to be approved by proposal, then it would be good to sort this out.
To be more specific, the proposal says that beauty=aesthetic means “Aesthetic medicine, cosmetician, esthetician, cosmetolog” and that links to Wikipedia which says that aesthetic medicine includes plastic surgery. That is confusing because that overlaps with the definition of the healthcare tag.
This is a bit different from the usual tagging debates about two tags that mean more or less the same, because some map styles (like CyclOSM) highlight healthcare features especially.
Yes, this proposal does not intend to replace shop=hairdresser. If a place offers only a hairdresser (and therefore is not a beauty salon), then you should use shop=hairdresser. beauty=hairdresser shall be used only if a beauty salon offers a hairdresser.
Then beauty=hairdresser shouldn’t be used on its own, right? It would only make sense as part of a semi-colon list with other services like beauty=nails;hairdresser. If hairdressing is the only service the it shouldn’t be shop=beauty in the first place. Is that how you intend it?
That would still leave me unsure about how to tag shops that label themselves “Salón de Belleza | Peluquería” (beauty salon | hairdresser) as it seems I’d need to know exactly what services other than hairdressing are offered. I suppose “Centro de Estética y Peluquería”, also very common, would be beauty=aesthetic;hairdresser.
I also notice that the table still mentions aesthetic medicine but I think the text is saying this is for non medical services.
1 Like
beauty=* should be used only for beauty salons.
If a place specifically mentions that it’s a beauty salon, then it can be used, even in case if it only have one type of service.
If a place is only a massage/tanning/hairdresser/etc. and does not mention that it’s a beauty salon, then you should use more specific tags if available.
I just came across this topic and I have to admit that I fully understand the proposal does not find much approvall.
Main issue is hairdressing. This should not be a subtag to beauty, even if offered in a beauty saloon. There is a combined shop around here, offering m/f hairdressing, cosmetics, nails and eyebrows/lashes. Most customers go there for hairdressing, few for beauty treatment.
To my understanding this would be
shop=hairdresser;beauty
beauty=cosmetics;nails;eyelash;eyebrow
Other services:
nails - there are shops offering simply nail design without the full range of manicure or pedicure services, so nails should remain as separate value but I agree that manicure and pedicure should be added as services.
cosmetics - this is a widely used value. Why change it to makeup?
skin_care - same as above. Why change it to skin?
waxing - a special hair removal service missing in your list
All other values in your proposal are already documented in the wiki. From my point there is not much more to do than just add manicure and pedicure to the list of values. No proposal needed for that, just do it.