Everything in the tourism section is more fittingly an amenity. I propose moving all those to the amenity tag and creating a new key, interest, to include the following: tourist, motorist. --Hawke 09:56, 10 June 2007 (BST)
- Yes, it is certainly awkward to have eating places under amenity= and accommodation under tourism=. As I understand it, you are suggesting moving all the tourism= values to amenity= and introducing an amenity=interest. There is no motorist category in the standard map features set. I think that makes a good rationalisation. I suggest refinements:
- tourism=attraction should map to amenity=tourism_attraction
- tourism=information should map to amenity=tourism_information
- amenity=interest should be amenity=tourism_interest or tourism=interest
- I like the idea of the tourism=interest (or as finalised) tag. I've often been at a loss on how to tag things like old country churches, quaint buildings or street, small castles which are of interest if you happen to be in the area but not something most people would make a special trip to, like a major old cathedral. tourism=attraction should only be used on the latter in my view.
- MikeCollinson 10:02, 11 June 2007 (BST)
- Sorry, on reading the proposal again, you are proposing a interest=tourist interest=motorist, interest=tourist,motorist key. Yes, good idea. It could also be extended to many other special interest groups in the future. MikeCollinson 10:08, 11 June 2007 (BST)