[Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - camp_site=camp_pitch

[marc marc]

Le 20.05.19 à 17:36, Jan S a écrit :
> I find camp_site:part=* somewhat complicated, too. Also, it wouldn't be 
> consistent with the use of camp_site=* to describe the type of camping 
> site, either.

tourism=camp_site + camp_site=basic/standard/serviced/deluxe

and if you cut the site in several parts,
camp_site:part=(camp_)pitch to describe each part

> I'd prefer tourism=camp_pitch. This also has the advantage that this key 
> can be used for isolated camping pitches that are not part of a proper 
> camping ground.

I find that it is precisely a defect. a camp_pitch does not define
a basic camp_site limited to a single pitch (use tourism=camp_site + 
camp_site=basic for this, no need to add a part if the part=the whole 
camp_site).

camp_pitch:part=* describes a part of a camp_site like building:part=* 
doesn't descript a building with one-part only.
so a part always need to be in a camp_site like a building part
need to be inside a building.

but you can have a site with only one pitch and a deluxe service
or have a site with a lot of pitch but basic service,
there is no link between the number and quality