Steve Bennett wrote: >I think the goal is to give broadly useful information rather than to map >all the subtle nuances. If I was driving somewhere and looking for a park, >I >would first want to know about "parking=customer" locations, failing that, >"parking=public", failing that, "parking=commercial". It might even be >helpful to know about "parking=authorised" places, shown as a P with a >cross >through or something, to know not to try and park there. > >I wonder if there be some kind of "parking=private" for things like parking >spaces near apartment buildings, or spots inside company grounds, but there >may not be enough distinction against "authorised".
I agree that useful is a good criteria, but there are times when "authorised" is not adequate. For example, different parking areas are authorized for different functional entities. Maybe I should know if my authrorization qualifies for a particular area, but there's a significant probability that I may not. >One question though: is this really the best use of the "parking=" tag? How >would you add information like motorcycle vs car parking, >underground/covered/openair, secure/nonsecure... I would consider openair as the default. How to handle the others needs thought. However, COMMERCIAL: There is a proposal in voting right now, under property features for "covered=yes" to apply to nodes, ways and areas such as parking. Since I'm the sponsor, I'd appreciate it if you would take a look at it, and vote. I'd like to see a definitive decision on it rather than have it die due to lack of interest :-( So far, a total of 7 votes. END OF COMMERCIAL > >Steve -- Randy _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
