[Talk-us] Best way to tag a campground/site?

[Alex Rollin]

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Extend_camp_site#Tagging_of_individual_pitches

+1

This seems to allow the tagging of each individual spot.  Wonderful. Should
allow communication of this information to potential campers.  Very nice,
go OSM!

--
Alex


On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 7:20 AM, Tod Fitch <tod at fitchdesign.com> wrote:

> Based on my reading of the OSM wiki pages for tourism=camp_site and
> tourism=caravan_site, I think the typical USFS and US NPS campgrounds
> should be tagged tourism=camp_site.
>
> On the camp_site page we have "    A campsite or campground is an area,
> usually divided into a number of pitches, where people can camp overnight
> using tents or camper vans or caravans." and later under links
> "tourism=caravan_site for caravan dedicated spaces". Implying that
> caravan_site is particularly tailored to RVs, more than just a camp_site.
>
> And on the caravan_site description, the introductory paragraph includes
> things like power, water supply, waste hookups, etc. which I don't believe
> are very common, at least in the western US, for USFS or NPS campgrounds.
>
> If you are getting into details, like group camp sites versus non-group
> sites and the amenities available at each, then you might look at
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Extend_camp_site#Tagging_of_individual_pitches
>
> Slightly extended from that but using the same basic schema it could
> include equestrian based amenities.
>
> -Tod
>
>
>
> On Sep 22, 2013, at 4:56 PM, Thomas Colson wrote:
>
> > It has been brought to my attention that our method of tagging
> campgrounds runs afoul of OSM best practices:
> >
> > http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/changeset/17949565
> >
> > Which begs the question: what is the best way to tag a campground that
> serves multiple groups?
> >
> > Most NPS Front Country campgrounds, and Forest Service as well, provide
> for “car-camping” as well as RV Sites. Some also include group sites (10 or
> more people not in an RV).
> >
> > We have been tagging them as such:
> >
> > tourism = camp_site;caravan_site
> >
> > Options include
> >
> > tourism = camp_site
> > comments = also_caravan_site
> >
> > but this will result in a very vocal and vigorous response from the RV
> crowd as to why we’re not using:
> >
> > tourism = caravan_site
> > comments = also_camp_site
> >
> > Another option is to use two nodes, very near each other, one for each
> camping “activity”. Most campgrounds are divided into tent sites and RV
> sites, but in MHO this is not the best way to tag these….?
> >
> > If the intended end result is for  consumers of OSM data to be able to
> “locate” a campground that best serves their needs (I’m sleeping in the
> backseat of my car or a RV or in a horse trailer), what is the best
> scenario here, when applied to 350+ NPS parks  (We want a consistent
> tagging)?
> >
> > Just to complicate this, some Front Country campgrounds can also
> accommodate horses, as well.
> >
> >
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Semicolon#When_NOT_to_use_a_semi-colon_value_separatorsuggest that most consumers of OSM data can’t parse the semi-colon, which I
> have a hard time believing: any decent renderer using OSM data can use
> “like” statements.
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Talk-us mailing list
> > Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> Talk-us at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20130923/004c282e/attachment.html>