<div dir="ltr">On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 at 03:07, Graeme Fitzpatrick <<a href="mailto:graemefitz1@gmail.com">graemefitz1@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 23:55, Paul Allen <<a href="mailto:pla16021@gmail.com" target="_blank">pla16021@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><br></div><div>1) Holiday cottages are rarely building=cabin, they are mostly</div><div>building=house. </div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>May depend on where you are? I know of a number of places that advertise cottages / cabins eg <a href="http://lyrebirdspringbrook.com/index.html" target="_blank">http://lyrebirdspringbrook.com/index.html</a></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Cabins as holiday cottages may be common in your part of the world but</div><div>in my part they're rare. This is a holiday cottage around the corner</div><div>from me: <a href="http://maenayron.co.uk/accomodation/">http://maenayron.co.uk/accomodation/</a> And these are</div><div>a group of six holiday cottages in converted farm buildings:</div><div><a href="https://www.trenewydd.com/">https://www.trenewydd.com/</a></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div> One around the corner from me is a former house</div><div>that has been converted to a holiday let. Even the ones on farms</div><div>are converted stone barns, converted stone stables, etc.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Shouldn't they then stay as their original type of building? From the buildings page:
the value may be used to classify the type of building. Note that it may
be not the same as the building's current use (tagged using <tt dir="ltr" style="background:rgb(238,238,255) none repeat scroll 0% 0%;font-size:1em;line-height:1.6"><a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:use" title="Key:building:use" target="_blank">building:use</a>=*</tt>). For example, a hospital building that is abandoned or repurposed to be a marketplace is still a <tt dir="ltr" style="background:rgb(238,238,255) none repeat scroll 0% 0%;font-size:1em;line-height:1.6"><a>building</a>=<a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dhospital" title="Tag:building=hospital" target="_blank">hospital</a></tt></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Indeed. building=house + tourism=chalet or building=barn + tourism=chalet</div><div>or building=cabin + tourism=chalet, depending on the original building type.<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div></div><div>2) A farm which has converted some of its buildings to</div><div>holiday cottages will have a mix of building types. Mappers</div><div>who wish to go into details would prefer to see the</div><div>individual holiday cottages rendered distinctly (as</div><div>they currently are).</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>But building=yes + name=xxx will still render sufficiently, won't it?</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Apart from the icon. Which, if you're looking at a map of the area looking</div><div>for places to stay is kinda important. Just building and name is</div><div>indistinguishable from any other building with a name. See</div><div><a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.08485&mlon=-4.65761#map=18/52.08485/-4.65761">https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.08485&mlon=-4.65761#map=18/52.08485/-4.65761</a><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div></div><div>3) This scheme has problems with individual holiiday</div><div>cottages, such as the one around the corner from me,</div><div>unless you retain tourism=chalet for such cases.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Individual as 1 cabin per site, or, as Mateusz raised, multiple cabins on one site?</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Individual as 1 cabin per site. As in a working farm that has converted just</div><div>one of its outbuildings to a holiday cottage. As in an ordinary house in a</div><div>row of houses that is operated as a holiday cottage.</div><div><br></div><div>I can understand some mappers may not want to add multiple holiday</div><div>cottages on a single site and want a short cut. I'm happy with that</div><div>as long as it doesn't preclude adding them as individual cottages later.</div><div>Some sort of grouping tag is desirable for searchability using</div><div>Nominatim. Some sort of grouping tag is desirable for rendering.</div><div>But I'd like to be able to present a usable representation of a</div><div>site with multiple holiday cottages so that consumers can tell</div><div>what is and isn't a holiday cottage without having to cross-refer</div><div>with a website or facebook page. Such as here</div><div><a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.10789/-4.61545">https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.10789/-4.61545</a></div><div><br></div><div>-- <br></div><div>Paul</div><div><br></div></div></div>