[Tagging] is tourism a good category for everything cultural?

Peteris Krisjanis pecisk at gmail.com
Mon Aug 23 11:03:33 BST 2010


2010/8/23 M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>:
> 2010/8/22 Claudius Henrichs <claudius.h at gmx.de>:
>>  tourism=artwork
>> + artwork_type=sculpture
>
>
> because of the quote above I'm raising the question: is tourism a good
> top-category? I think in many cases it is not. Even hotels are only
> sometimes related to tourism, while others are related to business.
>
> The wiki states: "Places and things of specific interest to tourists"
>
> IMHO neither artwork, nor museums, nor picnic-sites and the least zoos
> are "of specific interest" to tourists.
>
> I'd very much like to see a toplevel-tag cultural (and probably
> another one accomodation).
>

But does it matter? After long discussion about emergency I'm not so
sure. Yes, things which are can be interesting to tourists are mostly
cultural. But they don't exclude each other, so where is problem? It
is still matter how map is rendered and which data are selected to be
viewed.

In fact, culture is so overwhelmingly general word, that it can be
anything. I would avoid to use it.

It would help to see which old tags you think must be under new
cultural toplevel tag.

Cheers,
Peter.



More information about the Tagging mailing list