On 2018-06-27 16:28, Paul Allen wrote:
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 3:13 PM, Mateusz Konieczny
<matkoni...@tutanota.com <mailto:matkoni...@tutanota.com>> wrote:
I encountered public charging station for electric bicycles.
How this should be tagged?
Currently
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcharging_station
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcharging_station>
recommends
amenity=charging_station
bicycle=yes
scooter=no
car=no
truck=no
what sounds like a horrible idea,
I agree. But not for your reasons. Should be charging:bicycle=yes,
charging:car=no,
etc.
I propose to use amenity=bicycle_changing_station
(like there is amenity=bicycle_parking and amenity=parking).
And then you encounter a charging station which accommodates both cars and
bicycles. Which isn't a problem with the existing scheme:
amenity=charging_station +
car=yes + bicycle=yes. Which isn't a problemwith a more modern
version of the existing scheme:
amenity=charging_station + charging:bicycle=yes + charging:car=yes.
Which is
a BIG problem with your idea. Because then you have to use
amenity=bicycle_charging_station;car_charging_station and which one
gets rendered (if any)
is up to the carto.
I remember having been told off by someone who doesn't like namespaces:
"we are not doing like that" ;-)
But you are, like me, perfectly right using it because we could have
charging:bicycle:amperage=* different from charging:car:amperage=*
I had written a general such namespace specification with very strict logic.
But I will never publish it because of comments like above.
People don't agree on the order of the terms in the first place.
All the best,
André.
Paul
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
