On 07.08.20 19:09, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 12:00 PM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Aug 7, 2020, 18:05 by [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>:
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:27 AM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
amenity=parking + vehicle=no + electric_scooter=yes
seems like a terrible idea to me
Why? That's actually pretty good. amenity=parking is for motor
vehicle parking, electric scooters are a part of that.
Mostly because it will break all current users of amenity=parking
and at least for me place to place
electric scooter is not the same object as a car parking (in the
same way as bicycle parking
is not the same object as a car parking).
I feel like a data consumer unable to deal with access tagging is
already broken in advance.
+1 from my side.
It might be useful to have two different top-level amenity tags for
parking lots for large and small vehicles, but not one tag for every
type of vehicle.
Any new tagging scheme must be able to support parking lots that are
dedicated to several types of vehicles - at least those of similar size.
We must be able to tag a shared motorcycle/moped/electric scooter
parking area.
If we really need a new top-level tag, it has to be something like
*amenity=small_vehicle_parking* and comprise all of motorcycles, moped,
mofa, speed_pedelec, scooters (of any kind) and so on. Further details
could then be given by access tags to specify which kind of vehicles can
be parked there.
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
