Add fields to attraction preset

[srujanaelicherla]

Description, Motivation & Context

This PR adds the fee, level, and opening_hours fields to the tourism=attraction preset.
These are common and useful tags for tourist attractions. Adding them to the preset makes it easier for mappers to add this valuable information using the iD editor, improving the quality and completeness of map data.

Related issues

Closes #1634

Links and data

Relevant OSM Wiki links:

tourism=attraction: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dattraction
fee: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fee
level: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:level
opening_hours: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours

[github-actions]

🍱 Your pull request preview is ready

Please use this preview to check your changes. Ideally use the test documentation template and document your test results by commenting on the PR. This will speed up the review process for everyone.

FYI, once this PR is merged, you can use the iD Editor Preview to test your changes in interaction with all other changes.

[srujanaelicherla]

Test-Documentation

Preview links & Sidebar Screenshots

Preview link: https://pr-1713--ideditor-presets-preview.netlify.app/id/dist/#locale=en&map=17.00/14.65485/121.06466&disable_features=boundaries&background=Bing

Link to test object: https://pr-1713--ideditor-presets-preview.netlify.app/id/dist/#locale=en&map=20.00/43.67008/-79.39373&disable_features=boundaries&background=Bing&id=n4462028723

Tested by selecting an existing "Tourist Attraction" on the map. The new fields for Fee, Hours (opening_hours), and Level are all present and working as expected. The info panels for each field also display correctly.

Search

Searched for "Tourist Attraction" and the preset was found correctly.

Info-i

The info panels for the added fields display correctly.

Wording

• American English
• name, aliases (if present) use Title Case
• terms (if present) use lower case, sorted A-Z

[matkoniecz]

These are common and useful tags for tourist attractions.

are these also typically needed for things tagged only with tourism=attraction without proper tags specifying what kind of tourism attraction it is?

[srujanaelicherla]

Hi @matkoniecz, thank you for the review and for the thoughtful question!

That's a great point. I believe these fields are valuable even for objects tagged only with the generic tourism=attraction for a couple of key reasons:

• tourism=attraction as a Fallback: This tag is often used for unique local landmarks, viewpoints, monuments, or natural curiosities that don't fit neatly into more specific categories like museum or theme_park. Even for these generic attractions, fee and opening_hours are two of the most fundamental pieces of information for a visitor. For example, a scenic viewpoint might have seasonal hours, or a small local monument might require a nominal entry fee.

• Indoor Attractions: The level tag is crucial for any attraction located inside a multi-story building (like a shopping mall, an event complex, or an airport) which might not have a more specific preset that fits.

• By including these common fields in the base preset, we empower mappers to add this valuable, verifiable data on the spot, rather than leaving it out because a more specific tag isn't immediately obvious. It lowers the barrier to adding richer data for a wide variety of points of interest.

Hope this clarifies the reasoning!

[matkoniecz]

note: your comments sound and read like directly copied from chatgpt

[srujanaelicherla]

Hi @matkoniecz , that is a fair point. I was focused on making the justification sound professional and I guess I polished the wording a little too much. However, despite the wording, the core points are my own. I'll make sure to keep it more conversational from now on.

Anyway, putting the style aside, does the reasoning sound good to you?

[matkoniecz]

: This tag is often used for unique local landmarks, viewpoints, monuments, or natural curiosities that don't fit neatly into more specific categories like museum or theme_park.

viewpoints, monuments, nearly all local landmarks and nearly all natural curiosities have better tagging

why you think for example viewpoints should be tagged as tourism=attraction or that such tagging should be encouraged/supported?

[srujanaelicherla]

Hi @matkoniecz,

You're right, thanks for the correction. It was a mistake for me to use "viewpoints" as an example as they should always be tagged with their more specific tags.

My goal was about two other cases. Improving the 400k+ attractions already on the map and mapping the quirky stuff that doesn't fit another category.

Sorry for the confusion caused.

[matkoniecz]

Improving the 400k+ attractions already on the map

not 400k as vast majority is properly tagged, not only with tourism=attraction

[srujanaelicherla]

Hi @matkoniecz,
You're right, my mistake on the numbers. My goal here is purely pragmatic. tourism=attraction is already widely used on its own for many features on the map.
This change is simply about giving mappers an easy way to add crucial details like fee and opening_hours when they encounter those objects. It's a practical tool to improve the map as we find it today.

[tyrasd]

I'd recommend to avoid using tourism=attraction as the only primary tag of a feature in favor of tagging it as the feature type the attraction actually is (e.g. a monument, museum, church, etc.), which then automatically has the correct applicable fields and moreFields. That said, adding those fields as optional moreFields still does not hurt and should be fine to include.