Proposed features/Tourism Reform

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Tourism Reform
Status: Draft (under way)
Proposed by: nounours77
Tagging: tourism=*
Applies to: node, area}
Definition: As a result of the discussion on the apartement proposal, there were several ideas to simply the tourism-key by grouping similar offers, e.g. apartement-chalet, hotel-hostel-motel, alpine-hut-wilderness-hut etc.
Drafted on: 2014-03-13



Some statistics on accommodation in general

Some figures about the use of the "tourism=*" key: (Bold values are currently defined in the wiki)

value Worldwide comments
hotel 137 851 This seems to be a well established tag, and probably clear to everybody what it is.
hostel 12 516 Probably clear as well, but is the delimitation to hotel always clear?
motel 15 433 Well, this might be cultural. But is a distinction between Hotel and Motel really possible and necessary? Most hotel include a parking space and are close to some roads, so is a Motel special enough to deserve a proper tag?
guest_house 34 274 Also here, the delimitation to hotel/hostel is not 100% clear, but seems to work for me.
bed_and_breakfast 531 According to the wiki, this should be included in "guest_house". Maybe make wiki more explicit?
camp_site 47 720 Very often, there are combined camp and caravan site. Why do we need two tags for this?
caravan_site 11 307 Very often, there are combined camp and caravan site. Why do we need two tags for this?
chalet 13 706 If I understand right, this tag is currently used for three different meanings: 1. for a alone standing chalet (something between a hotel and a mountain hut) - and thus rendered at higher zoom levels by some renderers. 2. As a individual holiday rental house (self-catering), which can be rented on a short time period. (this is equal to "holiday_apartment", only thats another building type, and maybe that "chalets" are less dense than "appartements". 3. Hotel-like infrastructures (with reception, catering, ....) where you do not sleep in a room, but an individual chalet. I guess that use No. 2 is the main use (at least that's what the wiki would suggest), but I'm not sure.
alpine_hut 9 031 Seems rather specific type of accomodation. In the wiki it's said to be catered, which is probably an unnecessary restriction. Most alpine_huts are, if at all, catered only part of the year. If they are open in unattendend periods, this tag is very similar to "wilderness_hut". It was already suggested to merge this tags when "wilderness_hut" was proposed.
wilderness_hut 653 As discussed on the proposal, this could easily and logically included into "mountain_hut".
cabin 1050 Should this go with mountain_hut/wilderness_hut?
hut 112 Should this go with mountain_hut/wilderness_hut?
apartment 237 this is probably exactly what were discussing here, even though I prefer having the term "holiday_" prefixed.
apartments 130 Unsure if this is more "resort/holiday_village", or just the same as "apartment/chalet", but just in plural since normally, a building consists of several holiday_apartments?
resort 176 .
other x 21 holiday_cottage, 14 holiday_village, 12 holiday_flat, 4 holiday_cottages, 3 Holiday apartments, 44 hunting_lodge, 41 basic_hut, 31 alm (=famers house in the mountains which might offer food and/or accomodation), 66 camping, 23 self_catering, 17 shelter, 16 cottage, etc.

Advocating combing apartment and chalet

Dan wrote on the mailing list: "If I were starting from scratch, I might advocate tourism=self_catering. But tourism=chalet is very close in meaning (except for the implication that it's a free-standing building!) so I wonder if we can simply use that existing tag, and let the building=* tags help us decide if we want to spend our holiday in a free-standing structure!"

I completely agree! But looking at the list above, there are more tags very similar in the list. I think, either we go on making a new tag for every specific type of accommodation, or we group accommodations according logical criteria.

Other comments from the apartment-discussion:

I really think this is awkward, creating a tag that combines the use (i.e. holiday) with aspects of the building (i.e. flat). Why not just a tourism=self_catering tag, and let the building=apartment tag tell us that it's in a flat? --Danstowell (talk) 09:32, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

FWIW, the proposal has been updated with answers to these concerns. I don't have a strong inclination to argue further on this one.--Danstowell (talk) 10:06, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Combine hut, wilderness_hut, alpine, etc, also combine or condense hotel, motel, guest_house

I agree this is a mess. All the huts should be combined somehow. As for hotel, etc., I add those tags based on the name of the place. If it says Guest House I use guest_house, if it says Hotel or Hostel, I use that term. Motel is trickier however because in my mind, a motel is separate building, usually 1 but sometimes 2 or more floors, containing individual rooms. It's different from a hotel because it has no lobby or common sitting space. Of course, my view comes from my experience as an older American. I can remember when motels were all the rage, a motor hotel. Times have changed. AlaskaDave (talk) 00:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

First attempt of solution

If we group the current values on accomodation, I suggest 4 accomodation types. The names are just placeholders yet, can anybody suggest good english terms for that?

1. Catered accommodation: hotel, motel, hostel, guesthouse

2. Self-catered accommodation: chalet, apartment (the difference between 1&2 is not only catering, but service in general: no cleaning, no reception, no bar, ...)

3. Outdoor accommodation: camp-site, caravan-site

4. Hut: mountain_hut, wilderness_hut, cabin, hut (the only difference I see is catered/not catered between mountain_hut and wilderness_hut - so is it really worth making two tags? Not all mountain huts are catered as well, and most are only some period of the year, but open also the rest of time)


Please discuss this proposal, using the talk page for the proposal.


Not yet started