danstowell+osm at gmail.com
Thu Feb 19 08:40:08 UTC 2015
Yes Mateusz, +1 from me, sounds good -
2015-02-19 8:00 GMT+00:00 Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at gmail.com>:
> I think that attraction=maze is better than attraction:type (shorter,
> without colon, "type" is not
> really adding anything useful, clear detailing of tourism=attraction).
> 2015-02-19 3:59 GMT+01:00 Bryce Nesbitt <bryce2 at obviously.com>:
>> If it's of interest to outsiders it seems like an attraction. Thus how
>> name=Happy Tunnel Kiddie Maze
>> You want all those similar features (maze/tube hill/ride/garden/water
>> park/whatever) to show up on a tourism/visitor type map.
>> This is also a clear case where the existing maze tags could be mass
>> retagged to the new scheme.
>> You just want to be clear if a given feature is PART of a larger
>> "attraction" (e.g.
>> one ride in a water park), or if it's the high level feature (e.g. the
>> water park itself).
>> See also http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dtheme_park
>> and the associated tagging.
>> Tagging mailing list
>> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
More information about the Tagging