[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Subkey camp_pitch:*
joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com
Thu Apr 11 08:01:47 UTC 2019
Thank you for your comments, Graeme
> aren't you duplicating everything that exists under the
> tourism=camp_site & caravan_site pages ?
This proposal is for designating features that are available at
individual spots for one tent or one caravan (normally, although I
suppose a group tent site could also be tagged within larger
campground). They key tourism=camp_site or tourism=caravan_site should
be used on the area of the whole campground or caravan site.
The tag camp_site=pitch_site is only used if there are multiple
designated pitches within the site.
So these subkeys were made to define if there are certain amenities or
facilities available at an individual pitch, eg: do you have your own
picnic table, fire ring, drinking water tap, electrical outlet, and
parking right at the pitch?
It would also be possible to map every feature with separate nodes, eg
amenity=drinking_water on a node marking the location of a water tap,
but if every pitch in a large campground has a water tap, this could
lead to rather crowded map renderings.
I do notice that there are some alternative tags listed at
could be used instead, eg:
bbq=yes or bbq=no and openfire=yes, openfire=no instead of
drinking_water=* instead of camp_pitch:drinking_water=*
caravan=* and tent=* instead of camp_pitch:type=tent or =caravan
power_supply=* instead of camp_pitch:electric=*
surface=* instead of camp_pitch:surface=*
Basically the difference is namespacing. Should the keys be namespaced
like camp_pitch:drain=yes, or just use drain=yes?
With the camp_pitch prefix it is clear that this is a feature that is
associated with a single camp pitch, but this can also be found by
looking at the other tags on the same feature.
Either way is fine by me; I just revived this proposal so we could
discuss if it was a good idea.
More information about the Tagging