Presence or absence of a kitchen for the traveller does not define for me
whether it is a guest house or not.
I've stayed in places in Egypt and Pakistan which our company certainly called
'the guest house' which had kitchens.
They did not have live-in owners or staff (but did have people to prepare
lunch; we used it in the evening).
I've stayed in guest houses which were like a bed & breakfast place with a
live in owner.
And even ones which were more like small hotels.
I use hotels, apartments and an occassional B&B a lot and in many different
countries.
The name people use for their accommodation is inconsistent at best.
I think the best way to tackle this is to use sub-keys to define the
facilities on offer.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Koppenhoefer" <dieterdre...@gmail.com>
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools" <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Friday, October 18, 2013 11:35 AM
Subject: Re: [Tagging] tourism=guest_house or tourism=bed_and_breakfast ?
2013/10/17 Dudley Ibbett <dudleyibb...@hotmail.com>
From a tourists perspective it is quite important to know whether it is
self catering accommodation or not. It is also important to know whether
it is a single building unit (i.e. house,cottage,chalet) as opposed to a
number of units in a building (i.e. apartments). I would be inclined to
use tourism=apartments for the latter.
+1, an appartment would have a kitchen, while a guest house wouldn't
(often) have a kitchen at disposition for the tourist, nor would a bed and
breakfast typically. I also agree with the distinction chalet/cottage/hut
and apartment.
cheers,
Martin
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
