[Talk-us] Tagging camp sites within campground

[Tod Fitch]

Agree that they are addresses and probably some use of the normal address tags would make sense.

Since I sent out the query to this list I've been mulling over setting adds:street=CampgroundName and addr:housenumber=SiteNumber on each of those. The service roads leading to them are not named so that is technically incorrect, at least they aren't signed with names even if the Forest Service has assigned some officially. I suspect that would allow Nominatim to located them. And it would eliminate the possibility of site 1 in McGill from being confused with, for example, site 1 in the Pinos campground (next campground up the road). Tagging a adds:city as shown by that Canadian example seems very wrong.

On the other had, should I forego putting any addr:street=* tagging and only use addr:housenumber=*? Would that still be useful (i.e. be displayed by most renderers and findable by Nominatim or equivalent)?


On Jun 13, 2013, at 5:38 PM, Bryce Nesbitt wrote:

> What's relevant to map (and often hard to find in real life) are
> those number posts for each campground.
> 
> Calling them parking is clearly pandering to the rendering, especially for walk-in sites.
> But using the address: that has a certain logic.  What are those numbers other than
> the "address" of the campsite?
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us