[Tagging] What tags to use on a scenic route?

[M∡rtin Koppenhoefer]

2010/10/27 Dave F. <davefox at madasafish.com>:
> On 26/10/2010 21:42, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>
>> 2010/10/26 Elizabeth Dodd<edodd at billiau.net>:
>>
>>> The WTO definition is better for mapping purposes. Otherwise I have to
>>> decide if a hotel is used by 'business' guests or 'holiday' guests.
>>> These uses of a hotel do overlap.
>>
>> IMHO this is an argument against tourism as such: it is not even clear
>> what the tag is about.
>
> I thought you were disagreeing with me!?


I'm not disagreeing or agreeing with anybody but try to stick to the
argument, I think that tourism is the right tag for
tourism=information (also the right "main" tag), but I never agreed
with tourism=artwork, tourism=hotel, tourism=museum and others.

the definition says for the key: "Places and things of specific
interest to tourists: places to see, places to stay, things and places
providing support. "
I would change this and remove places to stay, places to see and stick
only to things and places providing support.

I'd prefer "accommodation" for places to sleep, and "eat_and_drink" or
"gastronomy" or sth. similar for restaurants, bars, etc.

I don't agree to use building for functions but would prefer to keep
building for the building itself, it's typology, architect, roof type,
floor number, construction type, construction material, parts (like
facade) etc.

cheers,
Martin