Okay, but the data consumer won't know how you reached that decision (to
count it or not). So whoever attempts a visualization of the data will
have no idea whether to put the parking lane next to the rest of the
street or put it "on top" (see
https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png )
This is not only an issue with visualization, also routers will want to
know if parking cars effectively reduce the usable width of the road by
the width of a car, or not.
This is why I initially stated that I see the need to distinguish these
cases.
On 19/11/2020 23:17, Andrew Harvey wrote:
The way I understood the tagging guidelines was that if there was nobody
parked there, could you drive along the lane as usual. If you can't then
I wouldn't include it as lanes=* and only tag it as parking:lane. If you
can drive along it when vacant, but you can still legally park there
then I'd include it as lanes=* and also tag parking:lane.
It's common that during peak hour the lane is used by traffic, but
off-peak it's available for parking.
On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 at 01:22, Tobias Zwick <o...@westnordost.de
<mailto:o...@westnordost.de>> wrote:
Hello all
First of all, in the past, we have explored many edge cases for the
lanes-tag in various discussions and I am happy that for the most part,
it seems to be quite well defined by now. However, there is one edge
case which is not uncommon at all but still unclear or awkward to tag.
Look at this:
https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg
<https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg>
It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems
obvious
to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll notice that there
are parking cars on the right side that effectively render the right
lane unusable. These parking cars would (currently) be tagged I
believe as
parking:lane:right=parallel
parking:lane:right:parallel=on_street
And the wiki states
> And the following lanes should be excluded:
> [...] Parking lanes [...]
So here is an ambiguity in the documentation. On the one hand, if the
road has marked lanes, the number of marked lanes should be tagged, on
the other hand, there are these kind of "parking lanes" which do not
have their own space marked as a parking lane but simply absorb the
space assigned to normal car traffic. In OSM tagging, these are also
"parking:lane"s as far as I know.
We need to dissolve this ambiguity by defining a way how to distinguish
between these two cases:
https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png
<https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png>
(1) a dedicated parallel parking lane. This lane should not count as a
lane in the lanes-tag.
(2) (parallel) parking is allowed (and used). This should be irrelevant
for the lane count.
My suggestion would be
(1) parking:lane:*:parallel = lane
(2) parking:lane:*:parallel = on_street
Maybe especially those who recently involved themselves with parking
lane tagging out and about and its documentation could also state their
point of view here. According to the wiki edit history, looks like at
least Mateusz Konieczny, Supaplex030 and Minh Nguyễn were active.
What do you think?
There is also at least one data consumer I know about that is using
parking lane information and displays it visually,
https://github.com/dabreegster/abstreet
<https://github.com/dabreegster/abstreet> it would be good to know how
they interpret and visualize the data.
Cheers
Tobias
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
<https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging>
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
