Proposal talk:Virtual tour

Content and format

virtual_tour=* doesn't really say it must be interactive 360deg 3D panorama. A "virtual tour" can simply be a video, even flat imagery not panorama. Do they count? https://naturalhistory.si.edu/visit/virtual-tour/narrated-virtual-tours
An interactive tour can also be flat photos, not panorama. The terminology of using "virtual tour" to mean interactive panorama, against "video tour", isn't obvious.
—— Kovposch (talk) 18:47, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

The proposal only mentions 3D, not interative and 360. I think even a flat picture series could count as a virtual tour, if they depict a tour of the institute.--Peter Elderson (talk) 21:50, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, flat photos only is a worse problem. The proposal's mention of "3D" is casual for a virtual 3D space, not strictly accurate. You can check the examples are interactive pano, and some are even from "360" namings. Technically, 3D could mean stereo, requiring special eyeglasses.
—— Kovposch (talk) 09:39, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Hey I looked up the definition of virtual tour and got the following result:

A virtual tour is a digital way to explore real places using videos, images, and other multimedia elements. The main types are video tours, 360° panoramic tours, still photo tours, and floor plan tours. Virtual tours involve combining visuals like photos and videos with interactive features to let users explore different views of a place. Virtual tours, including 360° virtual tours, are commonly used in education, tourism, real estate, and more. Virtual tours are flexible and can be repeated, but they lack sensory experiences and need basic computer skills.

source: definition virtual tour

I also came across the following article vr for tourism

There is also something like AR video

So wat do you think should be under “Virtual tour”? --BrechtD (talk) 17:35, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Virtual tours without a URL

Having looked at quite a few museum websites, there are some museums that offer a virtual tour (or audio tour) for visitors unable to use access the upper floor(s) of a museum if there is no wheelchair access to those floors. Such tours do not have a URL, and live on Ipads at the museum itself. This is an edge case, this tag doesn't account for that. Should it? --PCarewEG (talk) 16:22, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

There are museums that give you a virtual tour if you either install their app on your mobile. Others allow you to scan a QR code inside which is dynamically generated (i.e., it is not a public permalink or is only valid within their LAN). Some charge you for renting headphones and a portable device (conventionally an audio player) that would give you additional information for each exhibit when you are standing in front of it as if it was a virtual guide. Bkil (talk) 17:11, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

image=* as an alternative

You could list multiple images or galleries separated by semicolons under image=*. If the data consumer detects one under a domain which supports 3D panorama or modelled animation, it could show it on whatever map layer you have for select amenity with virtual tours. We already have contact:youtube=* that may already host virtual tour content Bkil (talk) 17:07, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

why a new tag ?

virtual_tour seems very specific. Do we want to rename a 360° map image of a small POI to virtual_tour just because it's a 360° image? You'd have to be a bit more specific about why the current tags aren't enough by giving a real example, because all the examples in the proposal can be tagged with image/mapillary/panoramax Marc marc (talk) 14:11, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Question have you visited the virtual tour of the Royal palace page ?

In my opinion this is not Mapillary or Panaromax since its hosted by the Belgium Monarchie.

Its also not an image beceause an image is static, in the example off the Royal palace you can walk around so its dynamic. A virtual tour is not only a 360° map image, its more dan that, it can refer to a audio tour, qr code that you can scan to see a virtual tour, link to a app seeWiki Virtual_tour (still under construction). In the proposal, there is no mention of renaming existing PIOs, further as you can see in the proposal, :virtual_tour can be used with a node, way, area, relation --BrechtD (talk) 15:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

The Place Royale is a good example of why a new tag might be necessary.

However, when I read in the proposal that a photo of a restaurant could be put in this tag, it doesn't give the same impression as the place royale at all, and I doubt that there are many restaurants with a virtual visit experience like the place royale.

That's why I think it would be a good idea to reword and refine the proposal to focus on the real uses, and not to imply that it could be used for anything 360° Marc marc (talk)

Can you point out where in the proposal it says that a photo of a restaurant may be used? Have re-read the text but do not see directly where it would say this.

Furthermore, there is also a bit in the proposal about what does not fall under this tag and which tag is more appropriate namely:

=== Other keys/services ===

* image=* - URL to an single image (use image if its ony one single static photo)

* OpenTrailView - Service to image footpaths (use the tag virtual_tour only for e.g. tourism=viewpoint, iconic track or signposted trails, in all other cases use OpenTrailView or Panoramax or Mapillary or ...)

Thx --BrechtD (talk) 18:57, 24 November 2024 (UTC)