Talk:Tag:tourism=wilderness hut
Wilderness huts without sleeping places
According to the page, a wilderness hut must have sleeping places. However, in France for example (specifically the Vosges mountains), there are many huts that have tables, a fireplace, cooking amenities and sitting places, but no real suitable sleeping place. Technically, you could sleep on the floor or on the wooden benches, but I wouldn't call that a suitable sleeping place. I would argue having a suitable sleeping should not be a requirement for the wilderness hut tag. --22:37, 3 November 2017 Creator13 (contribs)
- I agree, there are also huts (bothies) like this in the UK which are unsuitable for overnight use but otherwise fit the definition of this tag. Maybe "required properties" could be renamed "common properties" or similar. On a related note the required properties of Tag:tourism=alpine_hut are also too strict and prevent it from being used more widely. --Lakedistrict (talk) 23:46, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- I think that new tag may be preferable. At least for me there is a significant difference between place where one may spend night or not. Though maybe it should be solved rather by explicit tagging whatever spending night is possible? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:39, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
- Perhaps a tag such as overnight_stay=discouraged or similar could be introduced? --Lakedistrict (talk) 15:55, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
- Yes you're right SK53, I was going by the fact that the old version of this webpage (https://www.mountainbothies.org.uk/bothies/northern-england-borders/warnscale-head/) said something along the lines of "unsuitable for overnight use" - however that information has now disappeared. This is the bothy I referred to in the comment above and presumed that there were other bothies like this which discouraged sleeping in them. --Lakedistrict (talk) 23:38, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
