[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Campsite properties

[Sven Geggus]

Hello,

first of all, as the author of http://opencampingmap.org I
basically support any approach to streamline the tagging of campsites!

However, I would also like to point out, that the main problem we currently
have with campsite mapping in OSM ist not _inaccurate_ tagging but _no_
additional tagging at all!

About one third of the sites do not even have a name and another third have
a name tag as the only additional one.  This will add up to about 60% of
sites whith incomplete tagging.

Just have a look at the "Campsites with incomplete tagging" site I made up
using Osmoscope:
http://osmoscope.openstreetmap.de/#map=4/4.85321/40.84314&l=https://camping.openstreetmap.de/osmoscope/incomplete-campsites.json

Joseph Eisenberg <joseph.eisenberg at gmail.com> wrote:

> It's been a week since the RFC for this proposal focused on campsites
> and related tourism features. It which would:

Well not all Users of Openstreetmap-data are regular followers of the
tagging list.  Don't you think, that known users of stuff you are discussing
should be included in such a discussion?

I just came about this one reading weekly OSM news and I think that I am
certainly one of the known users in case of this stuff.

> It which would:
> 
> 1) Deprecate booking=* (use reservation=* instead)

I am usually not a friend of such discussions.  I just tend to enforce
streamlining tagging by using one tag but not another.  "booking" is
currently not honored in Open Camping Map because it is barely used, so yes,
if you like to get rid of it in a somewhat official way I would not object.

Another (IMO) mess which comes to mind ist this regard ist the "contact:"
prefix bullshit which made me include a tag-mapping feature anyway.

So with the current code handling booking in the same way as reservation
would be easy to do.

> 2)  Deprecate bbq=* (use barbecue_grill=* instead).

Well, in practice according to taginfo there are zero campsites featuring an
additional bbq or barbecue_grill tag.

What we often have is an amenity=bbq feature somewhere on the site, which
I honor on my map.

So frankly I do not care about this one that much as it is currently not in use
anyway and thus not supported.

> 3) Create new wiki pages:
> amenity=greywater_drain
> amenity=power_supply
> amenity=bear_box
> waste_disposal=yes/no
> bear_box=yes/no
> greywater_drain=yes/no

I do not currently support these.

However, it might be a good idea to treat an amenity=power_supply on the
premises the same as power_supply=yes on the site-object.

Is there a difference between a greywater_drain and a
sanitary_dump_station?

> scout=yes/no

In the context of my map I currently treat scout=yes the same as
"group_only=yes".  These are sites for groups (likely private) after all,
regardless of the type of group.

> And add new values to these pages:
> Key:parking - add parking=yes/no
> Key:capacity=* - capacity:tents/caravans/static_caravans would be mentioned

Yeah well probably capacity should be specified more clearly. In practice
this is even more complicated as some people think of capacity in terms of
people rather than tents or caravans. I currently prefer using maxtents as
this is more well-defined.

> That's a lot of changes. So if anyone dislikes one of these changes,
> please say so, so that I can separate it out into it's own proposal.

Well if you are about additional tags I would strongly recomend adding
another one which is already supported in http://opencampingmap.org

In Germany there are a lot of campsites which rent pitches on a seasonal or
even yearly base. People often use them as a kind of weekend home.

We call them "Dauercamper" which is likely called "permanent campers" in
english.

As this is quite common here and there are even sites for permanent
residents _only_ I invented a tag called permanent_camping=yes/no/only

Regards

Sven

P.S.: You may also have a look at my Open Camping Map Announcement
http://blog.gegg.us/2019/01/announcing-open-camping-map/

-- 
"Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have
 nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free
 speech because you have nothing to say." (Edward Snowden)
/me is giggls at ircnet, http://sven.gegg.us/ on the Web