[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Camp_site=camp_pitch
joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Thu Apr 11 01:00:43 UTC 2019
I have already updated the Key:camp_site page with a longer
description of this tag, camp_site=camp_pitch tag, because it is the
most common value of camp_site=*.
The reasons for the proposal instead of just making a wiki page:
1) To clarify that camp_site=pitch (1500 uses) should be changed to
camp_site=camp_pitch (7000 uses).
2) To add it to the official Features list
3) Give the community a chance to discuss the change.
All of these will make it much more likely that the tag will be
accepted as a way to render the "ref=*" of camp pitches.
(In the unlikely event that the proposal is rejected, I will document
this as well, but the tag will be documented as "in use", not added to
features, camp_site=pitch will not be listed as a mistake, and the
critical comments will be summarized on the wiki page)
Re: "... removed details on how to tag the amenities associated with
each camp pitch (the suggested camp_pitch:*=* tagging). ... by this
deletion there is no explanation of them anywhere in the wiki."
That's not quite right. These tags are till found on the discussion
page of the proposal
Don't worry, I intend to make a proposal page for the "camp_pitch:*=*"
tags, but because this is more complicated, I believe it's safer to
make it a separate proposal page. I just didn't have time to do it
Re: "many (most?) backcountry camp sites actually have more than one
area to pitch a tent and many of those actually are developed enough
to have fire rings (fires outside of an official location is highly
frowned upon). So I’d argue that a blanket “we don’t need this for
backcountry camp sites” may be region specific."
I did not intent to imply that this key should not be used for
backcountry camp sites in my earlier comments or in the proposal. Any
campground or campsite with multiple pitches can use this tag, whether
it is highly developed or remote.
On 4/11/19, Tod Fitch <tod at fitchdesign.com> wrote:
> I am not sure that a “restart” of discussion of camp_site=pitch on this list
> is required: There are nearly 7000 usages  spread pretty much around the
> whole world . This implies to me that what someone ought to do is move
> this old proposal into a description of how it is actually being used. Bike
> shedding it here among the dozen or so people that will argue this forever
> is just a waste of energy.
> The edit of the proposal made in the last couple of days removed details on
> how to tag the amenities associated with each camp pitch (the suggested
> camp_pitch:*=* tagging). These have also gained some traction  and by
> this deletion there is no explanation of them anywhere in the wiki. Not
> good! I am of a mind to revert that part of your changes just so the many
> uses found around the world have some definition of what they mean and what
> values are documented.
> Given the usage trends, I agree that we should deprecate the camp_site=pitch
> (and its associated sub-tagging) and suggest the camp_site=camp_pitch
> tagging instead.
> If the camp site has only a single pitch then I agree the tagging is over
> kill and maybe some simplifications are in order. But I my part of the world
> many (most?) backcountry camp sites actually have more than one area to
> pitch a tent and many of those actually are developed enough to have fire
> rings (fires outside of an official location is highly frowned upon). So I’d
> argue that a blanket “we don’t need this for backcountry camp sites” may be
> region specific.
> I strongly suggest the way forward here is to simply move the old “proposed
> features” for camp_site=camp_pitch, with sub-tagging defined, into the
> regular pages of the wiki that describe tagging actually in use.
>  https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/camp_site=camp_pitch#overview
>  https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/camp_site=camp_pitch#map
>  https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=camp_pitch
More information about the Tagging