[Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings
johnw at mac.com
Mon Mar 30 10:53:23 UTC 2015
That seems very wrong, as we tag parking lots with access=private and they are still mapped and rendered.
They are a camp site visited by hundreds, if not thousands of people, just a private one.
A camp I worked at handled 1500 scouts in 6 weeks during the season! All of them had to be driven there into the high mountains - sure would be nice to have it labeled!
it is not a private residence, it’s just a club building/facility, like a church, an office, or a factory.
these are famous access places for millions people in america and abroad, and well known and labeled on regional maps.
USGS http://www.efgh.com/c2c/c2ccuyamaca.gif <http://www.efgh.com/c2c/c2ccuyamaca.gif>
Camp Hual-cu-cuish is a private boy scout camp (SW of the lake). Labeled on official US maps.
the camp was destroyed by a wildfire in 2007 and is off of new park maps
> On Mar 30, 2015, at 6:43 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2015-03-30 4:01 GMT+02:00 johnw <johnw at mac.com <mailto:johnw at mac.com>>:
> They are just private facilities, but they should be properly tagged as a camp site, as people drive long distances to take scouts there, so they should be searchable and routable.
> IMHO scout camps, while they merit to be mapped in certain cases (recurring camp on the same spot, or camp exists for at least several months), should not be tagged with tourism=camp_site. As you write, they are private facilities and no-one can go there to camp besides the scouts of the organization that operates the camp.
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging