[Tagging] Draft Additions to camp_site

Warin 61sundowner at gmail.com
Tue Feb 3 10:36:14 UTC 2015


On 3/02/2015 7:51 PM, Tod Fitch wrote:
> On Feb 1, 2015, at 5:24 PM, Warin wrote:
>
>> On 2/02/2015 10:22 AM, Tod Fitch wrote:
>>> On Feb 1, 2015, at 2:50 PM, David Bannon wrote:
>>> I would like to have some of the items on Extend_camp_site page brought onto the main camp_site page. Specifically the site/pitch specific tags at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Extend_camp_site#Tagging_of_individual_pitches
>>>
>>> While they are not widely used, I see a fairly big geographical distribution which implies that they might be understood and universal enough to warrant better mention.
>>>
>>> And, of course, I used them myself when mapping a couple of U.S. Forest Service campgrounds. :)
>>>
>>> -Tod
>>>
>> I've edited the wiki page on camp sites https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dcamp_site  to include links to the tags for fee, shower, laundry, firepit and water tap. Tod you could do the same for your desired additional tags? Any complaints to me.. or just edit the page yourself?
>>
>
> I just set out to edit the page per your suggestion with the thought I could just block copy the site/pitch specific stuff from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Extend_camp_site#Tagging_of_individual_pitches to below your changes at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dcamp_site#Additional_Features and immediately ran into a conceptual (on my part) road block.
>
> I think that some of the tags I would like to copy over might be conflict with yours. For example, "Power connection point. May be connected to a caravan" (may conflict with "camp_site:electric=yes/no").
>
>

I've reread what you wrote. The added table is to do with adding other 
nodes/areas so you can see where these thing are within the camp site 
(or elsewhere). 'Your' tags are characteristics of the campsite and 
should go in the first table? At least that would be my interpretation 
of "camp_site:electricity=yes/no" .. So there should be no conflict that 
way. The second table things should be rendered as per usual, really a 
way of encouraging there use and reducing the search time for them. I 
don't know how yours would be rendered. Maybe things could go in a 
possible third table? Don't know .. see how it looks after a day?If the 
things in the second table are used .. then why added extras at all? 
Might be best to leave them out? Depends on people adding the second 
table tags, but that is true also for 'your' tags....


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150203/2e0ad021/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list