NOTICE: is no longer in use from 1st March 2024. Please use the OpenStreetMap Community Forum

I've seen more and more oddly tagged accommodations, tagged as tourism=hotel, tourism=chalet in residential areas of my city. Some of these places do not have a sign, others I'm not sure, but I suspect do not. I think these are people offering accommodation, via a website like Airbnb.

I feel like adding an informal short term rentals, like those on Airbnb, is a sort of spam. It seems pointless having accommodation on the map that looks like a normal house from the outside, and people can't just walk in the front door, and ask if there's a free room. Is there any consensus on this? Some sort of minimum requirements for accommodation to be tagged?

asked 06 Oct '17, 05:25

keithonearth's gravatar image

accept rate: 13%

was discussed on the tagging mailing list in March:

(06 Oct '17, 06:54) escada

I find it really hard to find data in the mailing list. Was any consensus reached there?

(06 Oct '17, 07:01) keithonearth

I thought "only when there is a sign", map them as guest house. But this is from memory.

(06 Oct '17, 12:20) escada

@keithonearth I've just re-read that thread, and I think that the consensus was pretty clear :)

(06 Oct '17, 12:24) SomeoneElse ♦

for the "unlicensed" aspect of it (i.e. hosts without a required license but with some sort of sign): you could use informal=yes for this, see the wiki.

(06 Oct '17, 12:42) dieterdreist

Personally, if it looks like a hotel / guest house / whatever then I'd map it as such, which means "no sign outside == not mapped as a hotel in OSM".

On the more general subject of spam, quite a lot of "broker" website operators are currently targeting OSM for "businesses" like "rubbish clearance $InsertNameOfPlace". Their websites sometimes have a street address on them and sometimes that street address matches the details they (or more likely someone they paid for SEO) added to OSM, but I suspect that many have no actual physical presence there, perhaps beyond a mail forwarding address.

In OSM, verifiability should be key. If a business isn't visible as a business at its alleged business address, it doesn't belong in OSM. If you visit a place and it looks like a hotel, it's a hotel. If it looks like a private house, then just map it as that.

permanent link

answered 06 Oct '17, 12:32

SomeoneElse's gravatar image

SomeoneElse ♦
accept rate: 16%

Thanks SomeoneElse. Once you bring variability into it it becomes quite clear that they shouldn't be mapped w/o a sign.

(06 Oct '17, 19:25) keithonearth

Hi, tourism=guest_house seems logical, please see :-

permanent link

answered 06 Oct '17, 12:17

BCNorwich's gravatar image

accept rate: 20%


It should only be mapped as a guest house if it is verifiable.

(06 Oct '17, 18:50) trigpoint

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here



Answers and Comments

Markdown Basics

  • *italic* or _italic_
  • **bold** or __bold__
  • link:[text]( "title")
  • image?![alt text](/path/img.jpg "title")
  • numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
  • to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
  • basic HTML tags are also supported

Question tags:


question asked: 06 Oct '17, 05:25

question was seen: 2,186 times

last updated: 06 Oct '17, 19:25

NOTICE: is no longer in use from 1st March 2024. Please use the OpenStreetMap Community Forum