Skip to main content


Menstrual products can now be tagged in #OpenStreetMap 🎉

The vote went through and the proposal was accepted! If you encounter a toilet that has menstrual products available (or if you want to document the lack thereof) you can now use

toilets:menstrual_products=yes/now/limited

For more information see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:toilets:menstrual_products

PS: In theory this was possible before but the approved proposal is a way of the community to find a consensus on how to tag. The new tag is now documented and can be included in survey tools like #StreetComplete

in reply to Pietervdvn :mapcomplete:

Thank you!
I tried to use it and checked

  • a toilet where mestrual products are already mapped: I could not see an indication to that yet
  • a toilet where no menstrual products where mapped: There was no question regarding that.

Did I miss something? I have never tried mapcomplete (which seems amazing!) so it's very possible I misunderstand something

in reply to Pietervdvn :mapcomplete:

Sure:

  • 11082891714 has toilets:menstrual_products=yes which does not seem to be reflected in the text description
  • 9015083896 says "No free menstrual products are available here" although there is no entry toilets:menstrual_products=no- I guess this is a sensible default? But then it'd maybe make sense to still include it in the questions? Same for 11128525907
in reply to moanos

There are two ways to tag toilets. One of them is `amenity=toilets`, as stand-alone point. Another way is to have `toilets=yes`, to indicate that a certain amenity/shop/restaurant/... has toilets available. In the latter case, this is not the main attribute.

MapComplete has _two_ layers for toilets: one for the 'stand alone' case, another for the `toilet_at_amenity` case. And I only added the new module to the standalone case, where node/11082891714 is one at an amenity.

in reply to Pietervdvn :mapcomplete:

(I'm personally opposed to having `toilet=yes` and _much_ prefer the toilets to mapped separately. It is a stepping stone to proper indoor mapping and allows for more nuance, e.g. what if the toilets have different opening hours then the entire amenity? What if one wants to add a picture of the toilets specifically?

However, it is quick and easy start)

in reply to Pietervdvn :mapcomplete:

About the other cases without entry, I indeed assumed that a missing `menstrual_products`-attribute implies that there _are_ no menstrual products available. The only cases I've seen menstrual products handed out was at CCC (which is very queer-friendly and in Germany).

However, I cannot say much, as I don't frequent the 'female only'-parts of toilets... Let's hope this changes!

in reply to moanos

can I use it for buildings other than toilets? for example our library has menstrual products available (but no toilet)
in reply to Ian Turton

The key is specifically targeted at toilets, so there is not a general consensus on how to tag other locations that provide/sell menstrual products. In discussions it was suggested to use: service:menstrual_products.
in reply to moanos

Yeah, this is one of my biggest critiques on this tagging scheme. But well, ...
in reply to Pietervdvn :mapcomplete:

I see. Honestly I think like there are many ways to improve tagging but felt this was the best solution given the current state of mapping and what I expect people to realistically map. Also I didn't want to introduce a "cover all" solution when there is so little experience in the community as a whole tagging menstrual products and my own experience with OSM tagging schemas is very limited. really hope that the community will find additional solutions over time.
in reply to moanos

We'll see. Wjen better taggibg appears, we can still retag everything