Proposal:Campsite properties

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Campsite properties
Proposal status: Rejected (inactive)
Proposed by: Jeisenbe
Draft started: 2019-07-03
RFC start: 2019-08-22
Vote start: 2019-09-09
Vote end: 2019-09-23


Approve several tags, most currently in use to describe camping areas in more detail than currently possible. This set of tags can be used to provide more information about the attributes and properties of a feature tagged with tourism=camp_site, tourism=caravan_site or tourism=camp_pitch (a pitch within a campsite or caravan site). Some of the tags may be useful with some other accomodation and tourism-related features, such as tourism=picnic_site, tourism=wilderness_hut and leisure=summer_camp. Some of these properties describe the characteristic of the site, and other describe amenities available at the campsite or pitch.


This proposal was based Proposed features/Extend camp_site, but it has been updated and extensively reworked, since the approval of tourism=camp_pitch and the adoption of tourism=caravan_site change the situation. Meanwhile, several of the proposed tags are already in use.


Several tags are currently in use to describe campsites and camp pitches, but in a few cases there are 2 different options in use. In other cases there are tags in use or proposed for describing features at campsites which should be discussed and approved.

The main issues:

  • reservation=* vs Booking=* - both tags have been used, but the tag reservation=* is much more common and is a better known term in English.
  • bbq=yes vs barbecue_grill=yes - the tag bbq=yes/no matches the common tag amenity=bbq, but it is somewhat ambiguous: does it mean there is a grill there, or that you can bring your own? Both tags are about equally common currently.
  • tents=<number> vs maxtents=* vs capacity:tents=* - there are 3 ways to tag how many tents are permitted at a campground or camp pitch. The last one is picked because it is the most widely used, and least ambiguous, and it allows tents=yes/no to be simpler, without numbers included as values.

Most of the other tags recommended for approval are already in use in just one way.

Tagging: List of Proposed Tags To Approve

Property / Attribute Tags to Approve

Should be approved for use together with tourism=camp_site, tourism=caravan_site, or tourism=camp_pitch.

For campsites, caravan sites, and pitches (and perhaps some other accomodations/tourism features):

  1. reservation=yes/no/required/members_only Can site/pitches be reserved or must they be reserved / booked in advance? If members_only, then reservations are only offered to members.
  2. openfire=yes/no - if an open camp fire is permitted
  3. parking=yes/no - if motor vehicle parking is available
  4. power_supply=* - availability of electricity
  5. barbecue_grill=yes - availability of a barbecue grill
  6. bear_box=yes/no - availability of bear-proof container for food storage
  7. Options: tents, caravans, cabins, static caravans:
    1. tents=yes/no - availability of tent camping
    2. caravans=yes/no - availability for camping in caravans (aka RVs, trailers, motorhomes), provided by the camper
    3. cabins=yes/no - availability of cabins for camping
    4. static_caravans=yes/no - availability of static caravans (aka mobile homes, "tiny houses") for camping, (semi-)permanently located at the feature.

Campsites and caravan sites in particular: (perhaps some other tourism accomodations)

  1. dryer=yes/no - availability of a clothes dryer
  2. kitchen=yes/no - availability of a public / shared kitchen
  3. scout=yes/no - If the campsite is for scouting (eg. Girl Scouts)
  4. shower=yes/no - availability of a shower for bathing
  5. swimming_pool=yes/no - availability of a swimming pool
  6. waste_disposal=yes/no - availability of a large bin or dumpster for disposing of rubbish/litter/garbage
  7. washing_machine=yes/no - availability of a clothes washing machine
  8. Capacity:
    1. capacity:tents=<number> - used for the number of tents
    2. capacity:caravans=<number> - used for the number of caravans
    3. capacity:cabins=<number> - could be used for the number of cabins
    4. capacity:static_caravans=<number> - could be used for the number of fixed caravans (mobile homes semi-permanently in place)

Camp pitches in particular:

  1. greywater_drain=yes/no - if a greywater or sullage drain is provided
  2. picnic_table=yes/no - availability of a picnic table

New Feature Tags to Approve

Also, these feature tags should be approved for tagging on separate nodes. All have already been used. Most have an equivalent "property" tag (see above), eg amenity=shower vs shower=yes/no.

  1. amenity=greywater_drain - a greywater or sullage drain
  2. amenity=power_supply - electricity supply point
  3. amenity=kitchen - a public / shared kitchen, available to guest or customesr
  4. amenity=shower - showers for bathing
  5. amenity=washing_machine - a clothes washing machine for self-washing clothing
  6. amenity=dryer - a device to dry clothes
  7. amenity=bear_box - a bear-proof container for food storage

Deprecated tags


1. Campsite

To be tagged on an area enclosing the whole site.

Key Value Description
tourism camp_site Defines the area as a campsite feature
name Lakeside Camp Example name
operator National Park Service Site operator's name
dog no dogs are not permitted
openfire yes Open campfires fires are permitted
maxstay 10 days The maximum length of stay is 10 days
reservation no Advance booking or reservationse are not offered
tents yes Tent camping is available (number of sites not specified)
cabins yes Cabins are available
capacity:cabins 4 4 cabins are available
caravans no Camping in caravans or other vehicles is not available
power_supply no Electrity is not available
drinking_water yes Drinkable water is available
showers no Showers are not available
toilets yes Toilets are available
opening_hours May-Sep: Mo-Fr 08:00-18:00; Apr-Sep: Sa-Su 9:00-17:00 The camp entrance is open 8 am to 6 pm Monday thru Friday and 9 am to 5 pm Saturday to Sunday, in the months of May through September only.

2. Caravan Site

Camp site with different pitches for tents and caravans, waste disposal, toilets, hot shower and a lake.

To be tagged on an area that includes the whole site.

Key Value Description
tourism caravan_site The feature is primarily a caravan site (aka RV Park)
name Lakeside Caravan Haven Example name
operator Max Mustermann Site owner's name
dog yes dogs are allowed on site
tents yes Tent camping is available
capacity:tents 5 Tent camping is available at 5 pitches
caravans yes* Don't tag. This tag is implied by the main feature tag tourism=caravan_site, so should not actually be added
capacity:caravans 30 Camping in caravans or other vehicles is available at 30 pitches
static_caravans no Static caravan (mobile home) sites are not available
drinking_water yes Drinkable water is available
internet_access wlan Wireless internet access is available
kitchen yes A kitchen is available for the use of guests
power_supply cee_17_blue Blue 3-pin socket with 230V is available
sanitary_dump_station yes a sanitary dump station is available for emptying caravan toilet tanks
showers yes Showers are available for bathing
recycling yes Recycling bins are available
waste_disposal yes A large waste disposal bin (e.g. dumpster) is available to dispose of rubbish / litter / trash
washing_machine yes A clothes washing machine is available on site
dryer yes A clothes dryer is available on site

2. Pitch

Camp pitch for 1 caravan and up to 2 tents with greywater drain, drinking water, picnic table, barbecue grill

To be tagged on an area that includes the whole site.

Key Value Description
tourism camp_pitch The feature is a (camp) pitch
ref B7 The reference of the pitch is B7 (likely signposted)
tents yes tents are permitted at the pitch
caravans yes A caravan or motorhome is permitted
drinking_water yes Drinkable water is available
power_supply yes Electricity available; socket type unspecified
picnic_table yes A picnic table is available for pitch occupants
openfire yes Open fires (e.g. campfires, grilling) are allowed
barbecue_grill yes A barbecue grill is provided at the pitch
greywater_drain yes A greywater drain for waste washwater is provided at the pitch

Applies to

Features/Pages affected

The new property tags would be mentioned on tourism=camp_site, tourism=caravan_site, and tourism=camp_pitch

Also some relevant ones could be mentioned on tourism=picnic_site, tourism=wilderness_hut and leisure=summer_camp

New pages would be created for each of the tags which does not yet have one (although most already do):

Edits would be made to these pages to mention relevant new tags / values:

External discussions

See several discussions on the tagging mailing list:


For discussion please use the Talk page: Talk:Proposed_features/Campsite_properties


Voting closed

Voting on this proposal has been closed.

It was rejected with 9 votes for, 5 votes against and 1 abstention.

most negative comments mentioned that too many tags were proposed at once.

The key nudism=* is already approved: see Proposed_features/Nudism, so it's not necessary to vote on this tag again. Nacktiv, do you mean you would like to add it to the pages tourism=camp_site and tourism=caravan_site? --Jeisenbe (talk) 23:43, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
yes I would like to see it approved as an option for tourism=camp_site and tourism=caravan_site --Nacktiv (talk) 11:39, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
I've added it to tourism=camp_site since that was specifically mentioned. However, according to nudism=* has only been used 7 times with tourism=caravan_site so I don't think it needs to be mentioned on that page. --Jeisenbe (talk) 12:11, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, I have changed my vote to yes --Nacktiv (talk) 21:42, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Jeisenbe (talk) 23:43, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Fizzie41 (talk) 01:14, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. There are multiple reasons for a no. The proposal wouldn't be necessary wrt the property tags as they are already in use and there are clear favourites, in general the voting process should only be used when actually necessary. Further this proposal tries to sneak a total of 7 additional objects through the approval process, some without any documentation at all. While we don't have a formal "single-subject" rule for these votes, this proposal would beg for one to be introduced. --SimonPoole (talk) 07:18, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
Simon, I wanted feedback on what tags should be added to tourism=camp_pitch after that tag was successfully approved. So, I created this proposal after your message on the tagging list which recommended limiting the number of proposals per user / per month: - What is your recommendation in this case? Create 7 separate proposals for the new tags? Would you then recommend submitting only one of these per months for the next 7 months? --Jeisenbe (talk) 10:07, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
I'm not totally opposed to making a bulk approval of a number of related object tags, but as is, for somebody not interested in camp site tagging, the fact that somewhere in a proposal there are further tags being raised to the state of approved is not discoverable without actually following the discussion and consulting this page. SimonPoole (talk) 09:53, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
"7 additional objects through the approval process, some without any documentation at all" - which new tags are sneaked here without documentation? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:35, 15 September 2019 (UTC) SimonPoole (talk)
  • I abstain from voting but have comments I have comments but abstain from voting on this proposal. I’m generally in favor of the proposal but think it is currently not sufficiently detailed for approval. For example the scout key isn’t defined at all. —Dieterdreist (talk) 12:04, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
It could have been defined better, but there is the line "Scout=yes/no - If the campsite is for scouting (eg. Girl Scouts)" --Jeisenbe (talk) 12:19, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
I admit I have missed this, but it isn’t actually a sufficient definition either, as you seem to agree. For example I would be interested if I could go there but may encounter scouts, or if it is a place where only scouts can go.—-Dieterdreist (talk) 15:07, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
For exclusive use it would need to be an access value. Messy. Access=member??? That could cover scouts and other organisations. As for simply seeing more of one group of people not certain that is worth mapping? Warin61 (talk) 02:35, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
There is already a tag in use "group_only=yes/no for campsites that are only open to groups, so I suppose scout=yes + group_only=* would be clear. Or we could add the value scout=only, but I think that's more complicated? --Jeisenbe (talk) 04:12, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. It's not perfect, but it's good enough. --Brian de Ford (talk) 12:32, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. I'm generally in favour of this proposal but vote no. You're introducing issues with this proposal (see the discussion page: parking=yes and *cabins=*) --Nospam2005 (talk) 16:08, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
1) Most cabins are not a tourism=chalet because they lack bathrooms or kitchens
How can you pretend that? The key is not defined on this wiki and Wikipedia doesn't say that either. Maybe in US English, you use that for "simplified" chalets, bathroom=no kitchen=no would make it clear. On a beach cabin you don't have a bed either! --Nospam2005 (talk) 18:28, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
2) The tag parking=yes/no has already been used over 4000 times, in addition to the common usage of parking=surface etc to specify a parking garage, underground structure or surface lot. Do you have an alternative tag that would be better? --Jeisenbe (talk) 22:36, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
As said on the discussion page: make a specific proposal. --Nospam2005 (talk) 18:28, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. This can be much better. Some I would vote for e.g. kitchen. I see no point in going from bbq=yes to bbq_grill=yes, both tags have the same meaning. If the misuse is to indicate the option of bringing your own then provide a tag for that, otherwise the misuse will continue even with a new tag. The tag dryer is still not clear if this is a mechanical drying machine or a line where washing is hung in the sun. Perhaps follow the washing_machine tag and use drying_machine? Note: I am going to try a multivote thing and see how that works. But I think these should be separate votes. There is no real urgency, so space them out, possibly the ones with competition first? Warin61 (talk) 02:27, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Re: "going from bbq=yes to bbq_grill=yes" - the two tags are used about equally currently, so it's a matter of picking one over the other. I agree that a tag like "bring_your_own_bbq=yes" might be helpful to add, as discussed on the tagging mailing list a few months back.
Again, make a specific proposal as it is NOT related to camp_site. --Nospam2005 (talk) 18:28, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Re: drying_machine - I've never heard this term used in US English, and an internet search shows "industrial drying machines" rather than clothes dryers. I've heard both "clothes dryer" and usually just "dryer." Supports used to dry clothes outside in the sun are called a "clothes line" when they use strings or wires, or a "clothes drying rack" if made out of aluminum bars (very common here in Indonesia). So I don't think "amenity=dryer" or "dryer=yes" will cause confusion, especially if documented properly. --Jeisenbe (talk) 04:08, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
In common speech one would be a 'cloths dryer' and the other would be a 'cloths line'. In some parts of Australia a cloths dryer would be very unusual as putting them on a line will see them dry before a machine finishes. In the UK (and other places) there are drying rooms... so if you ask for a dryer .. you may get a room? Ah existing key:drying:room=yes/no Warin61 (talk) 09:14, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
No matter what the US term is, OpenStreetMap is using UK English. Of course we should use shared expressions when available. --Nospam2005 (talk) 18:28, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Re: "going from bbq=yes to bbq_grill=yes" I believe the latter is suggesting an infrastructure is provided (a bbq grill), while the former could also be interpreted as preparing your bbq is allowed. --Dieterdreist (talk) 08:05, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
And some could interpreted that you need to bring a grill for 'bbq_grill=yes'. Both wikis state 'availability of' so the words are exactly the same. Expecting that the interpretation will change in this instance I don't think will work. Warin61 (talk) 09:14, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. I really want campsites mapped better, but there are some issues here. First off: is this a proposal for listing amenities of the camp or mapping the campground? If we are mapping the campground, we don't need picnic_table=*, as we already have that as a mappable object. Scouts=yes/no is very bad. A Boy Scout camp is access=Private + operator=[boy scout group]. If it is a camp operated by a scouting group, yet open to the public, it's access=permissive+fee=yes. Scouts=yes/no is a meaningless tag.

Cleaning up and standardizing how items are described is fine - but I want Mappable tags (this object is the laundry room, this object is the communal kitchen,etc), not cataloging a list of metadata that could actually be represented by mapping. Adding metadata to an object with no physical equivalent (phone= name= vends=) is great because those are important yet not a Mappable object. Open_flame=yes/no is a good one. But What purpose does picnic_table=yes/no serve? Is that a table in a dedicated picnic zone? A dedicated picnic table per camp site? It is ambiguous. Just map the picnic tables in the camp site using existing tags. Similarly, is the Barbecue per site? In a common area? In a dedicated kitchen building? Is there 1? 30? Just map them. Add tags like "BBQ area" or similar to better *map* the camps, not to replicate the bullet points on their web site in metadata - just link to their web site and map the physical camp site well. If you can map it with a point, you don't need metadata to represent it. --Javbw (talk) 23:26, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

picnic_table=yes/no and barbecue_grill=* are not for use with tourism=camp_site, but only for tourism=camp_pitch - these are small features where you place one tent or one caravan, within the larger tourism=camp_site area. It's also possible to map the picnic table or bbq grill as a separate node (e.g. leisure=picnic_table), but this proposal also adds the option to tag it as a property of the camp_pitch. I agree that it shouldn't be used on a large tourism=camp_site features, though it could be added to a very small tourism=camp_site which consists of only 1 or 2 pitches mapped as a node. --Jeisenbe (talk) 23:56, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I'm sorry I confused the usage. If you are going to catalog metadata attributes to the camp pitch, use some kind of colon extension (pitch:bbq=yes, pitch:table=2,) for attributes of the pitch that are not already handled by similar metadata tags (ref=2, surface=gravel, etc). If there is overlap (picnic tables and BBQs are mappable objects), then making them a pitch metadata attribute (camp:table=2) doesn't create an unnecessary duplication of tags for physical objects if a micromapper (such as myself) comes along and maps every object with points and polygons. If you want to introduce mappable objects, introduce mappable objects **that can be used anywhere**, not related whatsoever to camps or pitches. Any new tags for mappable objects should be standardized for usage anywhere. Also, adding "scouts=yes/no" is very very bad. It is access=private, operator=[branch]Scouts. The operator=*, name=*, and access=* will tell if it is a scout facility. perhaps operator:brand=Boy Scouts of America (or whoever) or perhaps just brand=* (or whatever scheme is used for businesses) would be would show affiliation to a larger national group, rather than merely stating the operators of specific camps (which are usually a local chapter that owns/operates it). This is vital, because there are different scout facilities run by different organizations (Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, Boys&Girls Clubs, etc) in the same region - "scouts=yes/no" doesn't allow for that AND breaks existing and popular ways of mapping corporate operators/brands. Please keep working on the proposal, and focus on the metadata aspect. I look forward to using it in the future. Javbw (talk) 01:35, 25 September 2019 (UTC)


  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Maxolasersquad (talk) 13:06, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --AgusQui (talk) 14:01, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Adamant1 (talk) 17:38, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I approve this proposal I approve this proposal. --Gileri (talk) 19:18, 23 September 2019 (UTC) But I would like to see scouts=* removed, and an emphasis put on mapping kitchen, showers etc as separate objects instead of properties
  • I oppose this proposal I oppose this proposal. Too complex to a rational vote --Deuzeffe (talk) 20:18, 23 September 2019 (UTC)