[RFC] Feature Proposal - Wave Lounger

Please weigh in on this proposed new tag, here, in the mailing list, in the wiki talk page:


Looking forward

I would prefere to use a subtag for the already existing amenity=lounger like:

  • lounger=wave_lounger
  • lounger:shape=wave

Wiki: Tag:amenity=lounger - OpenStreetMap Wiki


This is not a subtype of lounger. Lounger can be applied to movable loungers besides or within hotel/private/pools or indoor spas, it can also be applied to areas, either representing a single item - or a place, where commonly/sometimes/seasonally/depending on time of day/and who knows what - none, one, or more loungers can be found. That tag is broken beyond repair. If you have an idea for a new top-level instance I’d be happy to consider.

At least backrest=yes would not be beside the truth :smile:

@Hungerburg, one pic in the proposal with the loungers wall to wall shows many recognisable faces (so easy these days which AI searches), no child in sight, but still.

The single public service got dismantled, An Update On Our Use of Face Recognition | Meta - There certainly are private ones behind closed doors. The resolution of the photo is deliberately limited. All the close persons wear shades. In my opinion the photo does not invade into privacy as legally set in the EU. :sunglasses:

Your propsal page, 3rd or 4th photo in rhe example section is full res folk on a bunch of loungers one lady smiling straight into the lens.

Could you elaborate a bit more on why you think a wave lounger is not a type of lounger? I do not understand your arguments.


Not all loungers are wavy, so we also need amenity=edgy_lounger. :wink:

1 Like

Actually, my proposal is mostly meant to differentiate loungers such as this from loungers with surface=sett.

Could you please link to an object tagged as amenity=lounger surface=sett? I did not find one.

I agree that the wiki entry amenity=lounger is ambiguous as it talks about “a place for people to lie down” and “an object for people to lie down”. This may lead mappers to use it for areas where people can lie down on the ground or on their own equipment. However, the images and the rest of the text clearly indicate that it is about objects for people to lie down and areas with several such objects.

Rather than introducing a new top level tag this ambiguity in the text should be fixed. If needed a new top level tag for a place for people to lie down on the ground or on their own equipment should be introduced (I remember vaguely discussions about what we call “Liegewiese” in German).


Here Way: 1105365439 | OpenStreetMap one with landuse=grass.

I guess, in this location there are loungers. The approved version of the tag allows for such: if they are fixed installations or they are mobile stuff, e.g. provided by the operator of hotel/spa/you name it, and also where people just bring their own.

This tag is horribly bad and in conflict with core openstreetmap principles (only non-movable stuff).

It would be just as valid to map the area where lounger shown above with surface sett and call it a lounger.

PS: Overpass way["amenity"="lounger"]({{bbox}});

1 Like

“the OSM wiki is broken, news at 11” :slight_smile:

There are only 48 “lounger areas” worldwide. Almost no-one consumes the data. A subtag of some other area tag would make far more sense for “there may be loungers here”. A determined mapper could remap those 48 fairly quickly, though I expect that the discussion about “what to remap them as” may take longer. See also lounger as a key.

The accepted proposal was actually for “an object for people to lie down [on]” and is clearly aimed at being a similar tag to bench and deckchair.

I think the “area” tagging is just a mistake on the Wiki. Perhaps because the tag can be used to indicate where there are multiple loungers.

I agree with the others. A sub-tag of amenity=lounger is the much better option.


@Casey_boy From my reading, the approved proposal included areas where loungers might be present from the start.

@all - I’d like to rephrase the documentation, recently I solicited help in finding out about actual use RfC Loungers in public space - The tag seems to be more popular with the tagging community than with the talking community :wink:

As of now, I just cannot subclass lounger, it is too contrived. If there is consensus to deprecate the use on grassland and such, how to proceed? @Mateusz_Konieczny Does it need a deprecating proposal to change something approved?

1 Like

Do you mean the following part of the proposal?

If so, I agree that it’s not great wording and it conflicts with the definition of the tag. However, it does say “always” not “might” and the conditional tagging of seasonal is now well established.

I also understand the rationale of the area tagging. If there’s an area (e.g. on a beach) where there are consistently lots of loungers, it doesn’t make sense to tag every single lounger. Firstly, because there are lots (one wouldn’t tag each tree in a forest) and secondly, because the exact location of each lounger might move (even if the area itself doesn’t). Perhaps amenity=outdoor_seating + outdoor_seating = lounger would have been better for this scenario. Perhaps that’s a thing you could look at fixing?

Even so, there’s no reason why “wave loungers” cannot be applied to the lounger tag. Either it’s added to an individual lounger (tagged as a node) or a collection of loungers (as an area). Just because Carto (currently) refuses to render this tag, it doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be used.


No wonder with this definition :wink:

We do not tag woods with “natural=tree”, don’t we?

Thank you all, especially @dieterdreist who reworded the ambiguous text in the fine article in a Minimally invasive procedure. With all voices but one - on the mailing list - the use of amenity=lounger on an area that itself is not a lounger seems to be considered stretching the reading comprehension. So I went ahead and deleted the statement in the German Wiki that explicitly advanced such understanding, as such was not in the text approved in voting.

As I still do no like the use of the lounger tag for movable furniture in private spaces, I created Tag:bench=wave_lounger - OpenStreetMap Wiki - @tordanik, my apologies for not featuring https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bench:type=lounger instead: There are also edgy loungers as we have learned. As much as I like ordered data, one more layer of redirection via lounger:type=wave looked overkill to me.