[Tagging] How to tag entire group of rentable holiday cottages?

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Wed Dec 16 11:50:50 UTC 2020


On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 at 03:07, Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefitz1 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 23:55, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> 1) Holiday cottages are rarely building=cabin, they are mostly
>> building=house.
>>
>
> May depend on where you are? I know of a number of places that advertise
> cottages / cabins eg http://lyrebirdspringbrook.com/index.html
>

Cabins as holiday cottages may be common in your part of the world but
in my part they're rare.  This is a holiday cottage around the corner
from me: http://maenayron.co.uk/accomodation/  And these are
a group of six holiday cottages in converted farm buildings:
https://www.trenewydd.com/

One around the corner from me is a former house
>> that has been converted to a holiday let.  Even the ones on farms
>> are converted stone barns, converted stone stables, etc.
>>
>
> Shouldn't they then stay as their original type of building? From the
> buildings page:  the value may be used to classify the type of building.
> Note that it may be not the same as the building's current use (tagged
> using building:use <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:use>
> =*). For example, a hospital building that is abandoned or repurposed to
> be a marketplace is still a building=hospital
> <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dhospital>
>

Indeed.  building=house + tourism=chalet or building=barn + tourism=chalet
or building=cabin + tourism=chalet, depending on the original building type.

>
>
>> 2) A farm which has converted some of its buildings to
>> holiday cottages will have a mix of building types.  Mappers
>> who wish to go into details would prefer to see the
>> individual holiday cottages rendered distinctly (as
>> they currently are).
>>
>
> But building=yes + name=xxx will still render sufficiently, won't it?
>

Apart from the icon.  Which, if you're looking at a map of the area looking
for places to stay is kinda important.  Just building and name is
indistinguishable from any other building with a name.  See
https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=52.08485&mlon=-4.65761#map=18/52.08485/-4.65761

>
> 3) This scheme has problems with individual holiiday
>> cottages, such as the one around the corner from me,
>> unless you retain tourism=chalet for such cases.
>>
>
> Individual as 1 cabin per site, or, as Mateusz raised, multiple cabins on
> one site?
>

Individual as 1 cabin per site.  As in a working farm that has converted
just
one of its outbuildings to a holiday cottage.  As in an ordinary house in a
row of houses that is operated as a holiday cottage.

I can understand some mappers may not want to add multiple holiday
cottages on a single site and want a short cut.  I'm happy with that
as long as it doesn't preclude adding them as individual cottages later.
Some sort of grouping tag is desirable for searchability using
Nominatim.  Some sort of grouping tag is desirable for rendering.
But I'd like to be able to present a usable representation of a
site with multiple holiday cottages so that consumers can tell
what is and isn't a holiday cottage without having to cross-refer
with a website or facebook page.  Such as here
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/52.10789/-4.61545

-- 
Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20201216/aab7fc39/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list