[RFC] Feature Proposal – Library Types

[Minh_Nguyen (Minh Nguyễn)]

@Kovoschiz

First of all, I would voice my usual dislike towards private= , as it’s unclear what =private it’s referring to for this common keyword. Not only is there ownership= and operator:type= , but now also the possibility of lending= here. It’s further entirely possible to have libraries that can be accessed by students, but only borrowed by staff, resulting in 2 different private= which doesn’t work.

The street parking tagging scheme uses parking:side:private=*. We could take a similar approach for distinguishing between two or more restrictions that are private in nature.

@dieterdreist

Some libraries also have items that can be borrowed and others that may only be consulted in the library (or even in a special room in the library), or only if you can demonstrate justified interest e.g. maps, antique books, autographs (not everybody can “touch” the Bach autographs at the national library in Berlin, but if you are a researcher in the field you should get permission (and gloves) I guess).

I figure that the tagging on an amenity=library would pertain to the institution’s general rules. If each department has been micromapped at a library or library branch, the rare books department can indicate that it’s only for viewing, not circulation.