I better understand your requirements now, thanks for that.
I've looked at your site and pictures and feel we heave a fundamental problem.
Designated is fine and existing tags cover it but non_designated is harder to
agree to because of its temporary nature, I’m not sure OSM is the place for
such transitory, temporary data.
If a place that many travellers have found over a period of time exists then it
is as permanent as any commercial campsite therefore can be tagged as now.
As for Wildcamp spots then this is just a place you’ve found convenient to stop
and shouldn’t be mapped other than as a car park or layby using existing tags.
Wildcamping is a very specific activity and shouldn’t made official.
Jonathan
-----------------------
http://bigfatfrog67.me
From: Jan van Bekkum
Sent: Thursday, 26 March 2015 10:56
To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
Our blog can be found at www.DeEinderVoorbij.nl, video clips of our trips at
https://www.youtube.com/user/JanvanBekkum.
Many places we visited in Iran and east Africa for sure are no campgrounds
according to western standards, but if you need a place for the night your
standards adapt quickly. We also had many superb wild camps (different set of
images I am happy to share).
You must have visited the place or have a report from earlier visitors to map
it properly, but once you have been at the place classification is very simple
and well visible.
Most often we found the non-designated places from reports and blogs of earlier
travellers (we made an overview ourselves as well
http://www.deeindervoorbij.nl/camping.html), from travel guides like Lonely
Planet or by just asking at hotels. We recently came in touch with iOverlander.
iOverlander currently maintains a proprietary database, but considers to get
the "hard" data from OSM in future. Soft data (visitor reports and ratings) and
images would stay in their own database.
As far as tagging is concerned I think it is quite simple. We have three main
categories designated, non-designated and wild. As designated is the default it
would not need a special attribute; non-designated would get an extra attribute
while wild would get it own namespace tag. Trekking camps are in the designated
group.
Classification as proposed by Dave Bannon a.o. would be by means of an
additional attribute tag for designated campsites.
Any category (also wild) can have additional attributes to describe facilities.
Examples:
Regular campground with toilets, water, power, shower, internet:
tourism=camp_site
camp_site=serviced (definition Dave B.)
internet=wlan
A hotel offering to put the car on their parking lot and a toilet:
tourism=camp_site
camp_site=non_designated
toilets=yes
A place next to a city park with public toilets (like we used in Iran):
tourism=wild_camp_site
toilets=yes
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:04 AM David Bannon <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 09:10 +0100, Jan van Bekkum wrote:
> To give you a better impression of what I mean with non-designated
> campsites I uploaded images of places we stayed at in Iran, Ethiopia,
> Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi and Malawi. Have a look here and
> enjoy. As you can see the quality of the places varies wildly.
>
Yep, as you say, "wildly" ! I would not consider them camp sites to be
honest !
I am not as organised as you, but just uploaded a couple of my sort of
camp sites -
http://bannons.id.au/uploads/agate_creek.jpg
http://bannons.id.au/uploads/obriens.jpg
Its going to be hard to talk about these in the same voice ....
Is the solution to invent a set new of tags ? Or qualifiers to the
suggested values ?
David
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
