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

Paul Allen pla16021 at gmail.com
Sun Jan 31 18:23:03 UTC 2021

On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 at 17:54, Stefan Tauner <stefan.tauner at gmx.at> wrote:

> The ones not playing nice is not booking.com according to your story.

Booking.com provides revenue to maps.me in return for maps.me
handling their properties specially.  Other POIs not associated with
bookings.com can be reported to maps.me as being in error in some
way, the bookings.com ones cannot.

I have several doubts regarding booking.com similar to those of other
> problematic companies like facebook or google. However, removing
> references to them (e.g., establishments listed on booking.com) that
> are actually helpful to OSM data users is - to put it mildly - not the
> best idea.

Bookings.com, like Google and Facebook, often have misplaced
POIs.  If the POI is already on the bookings.com website in
the wrong place (or with other incorrect details) then having
that incorrect place tagged in OSM to point to the incorrect
details on bookings.com helps nobody.  People who look at
OSM alone will be misled if that link is placed on the incorrect

We can't fix errors on bookings.com but we can stop them
leaking into OSM.  If we had a way of correcting errors
on bookings.com then I wouldn't have as many
objections to their URLs polluting OSM.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20210131/80d8d110/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Tagging mailing list