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

[Thomas Colson]

I think the easiest solution is:



tourism = camp_site

caravan=yes or no



At this time, it is not feasible to tag each spot, although that is on the
“bucket list”.



*From:* Alex Rollin [mailto:alex.rollin at gmail.com]
*Sent:* Sunday, September 22, 2013 11:42 PM
*To:* Tod Fitch
*Cc:* Thomas Colson; talk-us-nps at openstreetmap.org; OSM US Talk
*Subject:* Re: [Talk-us] Best way to tag a campground/site?



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/20130923/73116ba3/attachment.html>