On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Tod Fitch <t...@fitchdesign.com> wrote: > > Any reason to avoid a namespace? Seems like tagging things like water > availability as amenities would show a lot of amenities that are not really > available to everyone. That is things like the picnic table, fire ring or > fire place and possible water may be dedicated to the people who are > occupying the unit/pitch/site. >
The namespace tags duplicates what can already be done. This is perfectly valid: * camp_site=pitch* * drinking_water=no* * picnic_table=yes* Indicates the individual pitch has a dedicated table but no dedicated water. The current namespace tagging uses: * camp_site=pitch* * camp_site:water=no* * camp_site:table=yes* Which uses newly invited attributes of "water" and "table". I think it better not to reinvent that wheel, and use instead: * camp_site=pitch* * camp_site:drinking_water=no* * camp_site:picnic_table=yes* Or with a more proper namespace: * camp_site=pitch* * pitch:drinking_water=no* * pitch:picnic_table=yes* But bear in mind pretty soon you'll hear from additional voices wishing to consolidate tagging, with the opposite opinion. drinking_water is drinking water after all, and pretty soon you'll want *caravan_site:drinking_water*, *areoway:drinking_water* or *waterway:drinking_water*. The use of the "*addr*" namespace for the pitch number is for routing, and due to the slow evolution of osm-carto (which makes anything else unlikely to be rendered in the near future).
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
