huh. I thought i read about it needing to be access:disabled... however
i feel like this should be quoted: "Nodes and areas tagged with amenity
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:amenity>=parking_space and
parking_space
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:parking_space&action=edit&redlink=1>=disabled
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:parking_space%3Ddisabled&action=edit&redlink=1>
are rendered on rollstuhlkarte.ch
<http://rollstuhlkarte.ch/?zoom=15&lat=47.37&lon=8.54&layers=B00000FTFFFFFFFFT>
(Wheelchair symbol with a small P in the top right corner; also see
rollstuhlkarte.ch-Wikipage
<https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Rollstuhlkarte.ch>)." and upon
inspection there are MANY, much more than the use of access:disabled, or
even disabled! is parking_space even a valid tag though?(i can't see any
documentation) because this seems to be the only example of actual
rendering, should we first see if we can get the developers to
transition to rendering the disabled tag before we change it?
On 08/17/18 00:11, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
sent from a phone
On 17. Aug 2018, at 00:19, seirra <gene...@sarifria.x10.bz> wrote:
also i saw some cases of access:disabled=customers? wouldn't access=customers
paired with access:disabled=designated be a good pairing?
actually the documented tag is
“disabled=*” and it has more than double the usage than “access:disabled=*”
capacity:disabled=* ist by far (30 times) more used than either of these.
Semantically, for a parking access:disabled makes less sense, because access is
about who can enter the polygon ;-) For a road it could be beneficial to prefix
“access” because it removes any ambiguity.
cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
