[Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

Jan van Bekkum jan.vanbekkum at gmail.com
Fri Mar 27 11:30:51 UTC 2015


Hi Pieren,
You are correct for most bush campsites where you stay mainly for the
beauty of the environment. I have mapped those myself only in cases other
reasons existed to map than. However, places you select for security or for
availability of amenities you want to have on the map. This will be more of
an issue in Africa than in Europe, but in countries without a camping
culture you need this. In my earlier mail I have given a number of examples
of such places that we visited.
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 11:50 AM Pieren <pieren3 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 7:41 AM, Jan van Bekkum <jan.vanbekkum at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > We can use tourism=camp_site:non_designated for all cases that the area
> is
> > not (permanently or ad-hoc) designated. This included the following real
> > life cases:
>
> Jan, I really appreciate your efforts to find a consensus. But I
> couldn't agree on tagging such informal locations. It is so
> subjective, it can be set potentially everywhere in the countryside,
> everywhere you can install a tent. If the aim is to advertise a nice
> point of view, the risk is also that you encourage wild camping on the
> same place, increasing tourists attendance (and littering).
> The best location for wild camping is a beautiful and unique spot
> which was never used before you and will never be used after your
> night, no ?
>
> Pieren
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150327/0468d8b5/attachment.html>


More information about the Tagging mailing list