[Tagging] reduction of the number of different keys talking about booking.com

Volker Schmidt voschix at gmail.com
Sun Jan 31 18:09:08 UTC 2021


Most places do not only have booking.com, but all other kinds of booking
site contacts.
If we put booking.com references, we should not forget about their
competitors.
And then they all appear also on meta-search sites.

What should be in OSM is the Hotel/Motel/ecc. with correct details,
including verified location.
The potential hotel guest will then use in any case the booking site(s) of
his preference.

Last, but not least, let me add my usual comment: who will maintain that
data in OSM?
Duplication of external databases within OSM is generally a very bad idea.

On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 at 18:55, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 31 Jan 2021, at 18:41, Paul Allen <pla16021 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I suggest we not only do not cater to them, we nuke them from
> > orbit.  Twice.  Just to be sure.  Until they can play nice with us,
> > I see no reason to play nice with them.
>
>
> I also believe they generally are out of scope for OpenStreetMap (foreign
> keys which are useless without the proprietary database, which isn’t
> publicly available).
> I would be willing to make an exception for pois where no website is
> known, and where the full url is in the “website” or URL tag
>
> Cheers Martin
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210131/19ec0ecc/attachment.htm>


More information about the Tagging mailing list