On 25/03/2015 12:38 PM, David Bannon wrote:
On Wed, 2015-03-25 at 11:06 +1100, Warin wrote:
No, not a decision for the render but information for the end user .. the most
important person is the end user!
'Customers' first! :-)
I don't think there are too many "end users" who look up the raw data!
The map user wants to search for the closest camp sites and then select for the
features they want.
Agreed, whole heartedly !
None= nothing other than an area to pitch a tent or park a vehicle.
Basic = None + a toilet
Standard = Basic + water
Comfort = Standard + shower
First Class = Comfort + cloths washing (+ power?)
Luxury =Comfort + camp kitchen/swimming pool/restaurant
Is
the water drinkable ?
Yes. ... forgot to stipulate that.
BBQ, fire places, defined 'pitches', metered/unmetered power, disabled
toilets, shade, grass, cooking facilities, rec room, launching ramp,
fish cleaning facilities, internet access, pets allowed/not, child/dog
minding capability, credit card facilities .....
Distractions form the major features that I'd use to separate them. .
Need a category system, for sure, but need a lot of extra data not
implied by the category.
The 'extra data' can be tagged separately? This give a clear boundary between
the class system. And still enables the other things to be tagged.
Fee payment may cover credit cards,
shade by marking tree/s on the map,
disabled toilets as a sub tag to toilets
power is covered by a tag
pitches yet to be defined .. but a draft proposal exists,
internet .. has a tag, \
So quite a few things already covered by tags.
What I think is needed here is a simple system to separate the levels ..
readily identified and easy to implement. The other things are, as I said,
distractions.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
