Petting zoos are rendered in the same way as normal zoos

[MeonStudios]

Context

A petting zoo is a subtype of tourism=zoo and is well described on the wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:zoo%3Dpetting_zoo. In German this sometimes called a 'Streichelzoo' and in Dutch it is sometimes called a 'Kinderboerderij'.

A petting zoo is smaller than a normal zoo, both in size but also in amount of visitors and "importance" in a local area. However because they are classified as a Zoo and there are no special rendering rules for zoo sub types, it is rendered like a normal zoo. This results in petting zoos looking out of place in the map (see screenshots)

I feel like strong colours (like the rendering of zoo) should be for fairly distinct and meaningful features, while a petting zoo is a slightly more general and a less distinct feature. Therefore I think it should use weaker colours.

Expected behavior

Have a special, less "thick" rendering for petting zoos

Actual behavior

A petting zoo is rendered in exactly the same way as a theme park or a normal zoo

Screenshots with links illustrating the problem

Petting zoo in a medium sized park, but while the park is larger and more meaningful, the attention is drawn to the petting zoo (z17).

Petting zoo in a residential area, which stands out a lot (z15).

Very small petting zoo in a park (right side)

Proposal

My proposal is to:

• Render the names normal and not bold (but keep it the same otherwise)
• Remove the second thick inner line
• Only render for zoom >= 17

Example screenshot:
Before:

After:

If there is consensus that this is a good way forward, I can make the PR

[imagico]

zoo=petting_zoo has 1572 uses, 1/3 on nodes, rest on polygons, Highest local concentration is in the Netherlands with 483 uses.

I don't think any kind of outline rendering is going to work here, in particular not at the large scales we are talking about here. It would obscure any kind of barrier mapping and would be non-intiuitive regarding the type of feature it is meant to depict. zoo=petting_zoo would, however, be clearly something that can be illustrated with a pictorial symbol in a way that is intuitively understandable.

I would suggest to look at this also in the context of depiction of animal related infrastructure in this style in general - which so far is not very systematic and full of loose ends and simply lacking in large areas (partly due to the lack of consistent mapping practice in OSM). Relevant issues are for example #2344, #3041, #3775, #3966, #4260.

[MeonStudios]

I don't think any kind of outline rendering is going to work here, in particular not at the large scales we are talking about here. It would obscure any kind of barrier mapping

I see your point there, maybe a small outline similar to the playground could be used together with a single pictorial symbol in the middle of the area (similar to the first suggestion in #3041). Do I understand you correctly that you agree the current rendering is non-intuitive and doesn't really work?

To come up with pictorial symbol is an interesting challenge though, as petting zoos have a range of different animals. I think most common are farm animals and deer so with that in mind, a sheep or goat could be used, however it is also important to keep the meaning clear for 'generic' petting zoo's and that it is not just about a sheep/goat. Do you (or anyone else) have any ideas on this?

Secondly designing and creating an icon is not really within my skillset, so if anyone is willing to come up with a design that would be much appreciated.

[imagico]

Do I understand you correctly that you agree the current rendering is non-intuitive and doesn't really work?

Personally, I don't think the rendering of tourism=zoo we currently have is working well, or the design idea of a thick, asymmetric, semitransparent outline to visualize polygon features in general. But that is just my personal view and not consensus position of the maintainers.

I don't think the styling is particularly bad for zoo=petting_zoo - but as said the more specific feature is easier to visualize with a pictorial symbol than the more generic tourism=zoo.

But i like to point out that using a pictorial symbol is not a requirement, if someone develops a suitable design concept for animal related features that is not based on pictorial symbols that is perfectly fine as well.

And yes, this kind of issue is not a technical problem that can be solved through programming alone. It is at the core of map design. No one should be discouraged by the lack of experience to try working on this - but you'd need to be ready and willing to delve into the design aspect.

For people more interested in the coding and software development side of the project there are plenty of worthy targets as well - both small and big.