[Tagging] Tourism=attraction: feature or secondary tag?

Joseph Eisenberg joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Wed Dec 5 13:28:59 UTC 2018

Does anyone have a specific example of a place that should be tagged
tourism=attraction but which cannot also be tagged with another feature?
On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 9:55 PM Daniel Koć <daniel at koć.pl> wrote:

> W dniu 05.12.2018 o 11:40, Christoph Hormann pisze:
> > It would certainly be good to stop rendering it to incentivize mappers
> > to choose more meaningful tags instead but it also should be said that
> > this is essentially a case of 'damage done' - the tag is already
> > meaningless, stopping to render it would help better tagging in the
> > future, it would not in any way add meaning to the tag as it is already
> > used.
> While I agree with your description of attraction tag, I am not sure if
> this would help. If this is tagging for rendering, you can render more
> features, so cheating would not be needed (and we do it at OSM Carto),
> but stopping to render it might as well make people abuse other tags.
> People are not that simple, imposing something is not a sure way of
> reaching some goal, it can easily backfire.
> > We have however many other tags where OSM-Carto recently added or
> > changed rendering in ways that provide mapping incentives agaist the
> > established meaning of the tags.
> I'm not sure what are you talking about (most probably I just don't
> share your point of view), but I don't remember such cases.
> --
> "Excuse me, I have some growing up to do" [P. Gabriel]
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20181205/06c3e2c5/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list