Talk:Tag:tourism=picnic site

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Why is this under tourism=*? To me a picnic site fits under amenity=*, and closely relates to amenity=bbq. --Elyk 05:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

  • In Germany a picnic site is mostly related to hiking trails. So for me it's tourism. But it's also amentity. --Falcius 08:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
As a tourist I don't think a picnic site would be on my list of things to see. It doesn't sound like a tourist attraction. The hiking trail would be more worthy of some form of tourism tag, but then again anything could have a tourism tag applied because somebody might want to see or tour it. --Elyk 03:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
When I look at the other tourism=* tags I see similar problems with tourism=camp_site and tourism=hotel. So may be your definition is to close. Most people use tourism=* not only in your way for sights but also for touristic infrastructure. For this opinion have also a look at OSM tagwatch.--Falcius 08:10, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
  • In Germany a picnic site mostly consists a table with seats. In this case a barbecue grill is an aditional tag (barbecue_grill=yes). --Falcius 08:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Table and benches

Should it be taken for granted that anything previously tagged as tourism=picnic_site has at least the bench and table, if not specified by, say, table=no? I could fill some parks with picnic_sites (distinct locations, even), but users might be mislead into thinking there's tables everywhere... Retagging all/most picnic_sites added to date with man_made=table and amenity=bench seems somewhat wasted time and runs into trouble when there picnic site is under a amenity=shelter and has a amenity=bench. amenity=toilets are usually some distance away when present. Alv 12:29, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Render on OSM


All nodes with this property are not displayed on OSM map.

Why ??

--ComputerHotline 15:59, 6 May 2012 (BST)