[Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbekkum at gmail.com
Sat Mar 21 07:42:19 UTC 2015


Thanks Dave and Dave,

I have changed the designated campground as proposed and made
RV/Motorhome/Caravan more explicit. For consistency rendering is now using
the same (tent) symbol for all categories, but in different colours.

I did leave in the 6th category. It will always be an area. It follows up
on the discussion that camping in a large area in a park may be allowed
(category 6), but that within that large area some popular spots exist
(category 3).

Regards,

Jan

On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 1:30 AM David Bannon <dbannon at internode.on.net>
wrote:

> Dave, to clarify. You use the term 'RV' as meaning a MotorHome,
> accommodation built on a truck chassis, and excluding things towed
> behind a car, SUV or 4x4 ?
>
> Here, we use RV to mean Motorhome, caravan, camper. Sometimes even
> broader.
>
> David
>
> On Sat, 2015-03-21 at 06:34 +0700, Dave Swarthout wrote:
> >
> >
> > I like the idea behind this proposal overall but feel some
> > clarifications are needed. In the first section: Designated means set
> > aside for the purpose of camping, so that part is fine. But then you
> > say:
> >         2. Designated campground (camp_site=designated) - areas that
> >         are made available for camping on a non-commercial basis,
> >         usually for an overnight RV or caravan stay, but that are
> >         equipped with no or few facilities and charge no or a nominal
> >         fee;
> >
> >
> > if you reword it to say:
> >  "areas that are available for camping on a non-commercial basis,
> > often for RV or caravan use, and that have at a minimum facilities
> > like toilets, trash disposal and drinking water. Such sites may be
> > free or charge a fee and may be located inside a public park or other
> > recreation area. If the site is only for tents or only for RVs, add
> > caravan=no or tents=no,  etc. "
> >
> >
> > you will remove the bias toward RVs your version has and expand the
> > definition to include more campgrounds. This sort of campground, along
> > with the commercial types, is probably the most common type in the
> > U.S. If you leave it as is, the bulk of the camping facilities in the
> > U.S. and Alaska will not have a strong match to any of your
> > categories. With this definition there, you can discard the 6th
> > category entirely. I would venture to say 99% of campgrounds inside of
> > National and State Parks and National Recreation areas are
> > "designated", you cannot just camp anywhere.
> >
> >
> > Under Rendering:
> > Your choice of an RV icon for designated sites is not good because it
> > implies RV usage is the major type of camping at this place.
> >
> >
> > Also, you say
> > Commercial and undefined campgrounds: Blue tent
> > symbol Camping.n.16.png as currently in place
> >
> > Why do you use the word undefined. It's the first time that word
> > appears in the proposal and has no . I think you should say,
> > commercial sites or sites that are tagged tourism=camp_site but have
> > no other clarifying tags, should get the blue tent symbol.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 3:59 AM, Jan van Bekkum
> > <jan.vanbekkum at gmail.com> wrote:
> >         I have updated the proposal with the feedback as much as
> >         possible.
> >
> >         Met vriendelijke groet/with kind regards,
> >
> >         Jan van Bekkum
> >         www.DeEinderVoorbij.nl
> >
> >         On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 1:55 PM, John Willis <johnw at mac.com>
> >         wrote:
> >
> >                 I understand the risk of confusion, but:
> >
> >                 A - if there is any "informal" kind of tag there would
> >                 be people who tag particularly good sites to pitch a
> >                 tent in national parks or whatnot with them, and
> >                 though I can only think of a couple myself I'd
> >                 consider good enough to map, people will want to share
> >                 this as soon as they see "informal" is available,
> >                 so...
> >
> >                 B - I  don't want informal - either turnout
> >                 car-camping, hotel adjacent camping, nor random
> >                 trekking camp clearings confused in any way with
> >                 proper, designated, car-camping /tent camping /
> >                 caravan facilities - and giving people a couple extra
> >                 tag values is going the reduce confusion so the actual
> >                 maintained camp sites are labeled and marked correctly
> >                 by taggers. I thought about the few car camping ("auto
> >                 camp") / tent camping sites I'd seen in Japan recently
> >                 and thought about how I would tag those, and the
> >                 thoughts about tent platforms came to mind, for
> >                 example, same with tagging their immaculate kitchens
> >                 and amenities in another thread.
> >
> >                 I'm not a big camper anymore, nor campsite tagger, but
> >                 I have been on hundreds of camping trips, covering
> >                 every facility mentioned several times over (save
> >                 RV/caravan sites) and there seems to be big
> >                 distinctions between all the kinds I mentioned - and
> >                 being able to convey those in tags seems relevant -
> >                 though maybe my input is not as important because I'm
> >                 not so interested in tagging those kind of sites.
> >
> >                 I hope my input was helpful, I will be voting yes on
> >                 whatever is decided.
> >
> >                 Javbw
> >
> >                 > On Mar 15, 2015, at 8:46 PM, sly (sylvain letuffe)
> >                 <liste2 at letuffe.org> wrote:
> >                 >
> >                 > dieterdreist wrote
> >                 >>> Am 14.03.2015 um 05:41 schrieb John Willis <
> >                 >
> >                 >> johnw@
> >                 >
> >                 >> >:
> >                 >>>
> >                 >>> and mapping them for other Trekkers would be
> >                 useful only if they are not
> >                 >>> confused at all with all of the other, more
> >                 substatial or easily accessed
> >                 >>> spots in a camp or along a road.
> >                 >>
> >                 >> +1, I believe the tag for informal camping spots
> >                 should not just be a sub
> >                 >> key added to the same tag as for a commercial or
> >                 otherwise official camp
> >                 >> site, it should be a different main tag
> >                 >
> >                 > +1 from me as well. Too much risks of confusion of
> >                 too different concepts.
> >                 > (Please note that I just discovered on that page the
> >                 existence of
> >                 > impromptu=yes which imho should be warned against on
> >                 the wiki, and given
> >                 > it's rather low usage (400) after 8 years of
> >                 existence, could also be marked
> >                 > as proposed for deprecation in favor of another
> >                 tourism=x top tag
> >                 >
> >                 >
> >                 >
> >                 > -----
> >                 > --
> >                 > sly, contact direct : sylvain /a\ letuffe o r g
> >                 > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Sletuffe
> >                 > --
> >                 > View this message in context:
> >                 http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Tagging-established-
> unofficial-and-wild-campings-tp5834677p5837225.html
> >                 > Sent from the Tagging mailing list archive at
> >                 Nabble.com.
> >                 >
> >                 > _______________________________________________
> >                 > Tagging mailing list
> >                 > Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> >                 > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> >
> >                 _______________________________________________
> >                 Tagging mailing list
> >                 Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> >                 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         _______________________________________________
> >         Tagging mailing list
> >         Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> >         https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dave Swarthout
> > Homer, Alaska
> > Chiang Mai, Thailand
> > Travel Blog at http://dswarthout.blogspot.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tagging mailing list
> > Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150321/3763730e/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list