Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking
On 25/07/2020 03.34, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: On 24. Jul 2020, at 16:18, Matthew Woehlke wrote: if there is no name, what makes a parking space logically one lot? Consisting of one contiguous surface? Clearly associated with the same building? but it’s clearly distinct things: a motorcycle parking and a parking for automobiles... What is "clear" to you is not "clear" to everyone. I look at those and I see *one* parking lot. By your logic, we should also carve out disabled parking, PEV parking, carry-out parking, etc. from all parking lots. IM(NSH)O, that's dumb. *Especially* if parking spaces are mapped. -- Matthew ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking
sent from a phone > On 24. Jul 2020, at 16:18, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > >>> ...and what if we're mapping spaces? I'm not sure I'm on board with >>> dividing things which are logically "one parking lot" >> if there is no name, what makes a parking space logically one lot? > > Consisting of one contiguous surface? Clearly associated with the same > building? but it’s clearly distinct things: a motorcycle parking and a parking for automobiles... Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking
On 24/07/2020 10.44, Paul Allen wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 15:20, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/828934579 and
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/828934591, or (even better)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/828934580 and
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/828934583. To wit, in both cases,
dividing the "separate lots" from each other requires drawing an
absolutely arbitrary line on the pavement.
That second pair of examples. Ugh!
I think I'd try mapping them as a single parking lot and add parking
spaces. Even though we don't currently have a way of tagging
motorcycle spaces, the relative sizes would give a clue.
Yeah, I'm probably going to rework it that way... and I am very
seriously thinking about proposing capacity:motorcycle (and
capacity:carry_out!) and parking_space={motorcycle,carry_out}.
--
Matthew
___
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking
On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 15:20, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > > For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/828934579 and > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/828934591, or (even better) > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/828934580 and > https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/828934583. To wit, in both cases, > dividing the "separate lots" from each other requires drawing an > absolutely arbitrary line on the pavement. > That second pair of examples. Ugh! I think I'd try mapping them as a single parking lot and add parking spaces. Even though we don't currently have a way of tagging motorcycle spaces, the relative sizes would give a clue. Alternatively, two separate parking lots combined as a multipolygon. In this case I'd alter the outline of the motorcycle lot so that it shared a common way segment with the main lot rather than having that peculiar shape. I'd put that arbitrary line sort of equidistant from motorcycle spaces and car spaces, adjusted may so it delineates where cars can't (or wouldn't) go. Tricky. -- Paul ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking
On 24/07/2020 02.19, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: On 23. Jul 2020, at 21:31, Matthew Woehlke wrote: ...and what if we're mapping spaces? I'm not sure I'm on board with dividing things which are logically "one parking lot" if there is no name, what makes a parking space logically one lot? Consisting of one contiguous surface? Clearly associated with the same building? For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/828934579 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/828934591, or (even better) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/828934580 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/828934583. To wit, in both cases, dividing the "separate lots" from each other requires drawing an absolutely arbitrary line on the pavement. -- Matthew ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking
sent from a phone > On 23. Jul 2020, at 21:31, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > > ...and what if we're mapping spaces? I'm not sure I'm on board with dividing > things which are logically "one parking lot" if there is no name, what makes a parking space logically one lot? Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking
On 22/07/2020 20.49, Warin wrote: You asked for 'better' without defining what better means to you. To me it is 'better' to know where these things are (requires more work by the mapper) rather than that they are somewhere inside some area (requires less work by the mapper). Disabled parking to me is 'better' mapped as a separate thing, as is truck parking etc. While a motorcycle may legal park where a car parking space is the same cannot be said of a motorcycle parking space given the usual sized of the things. Tags may be available for those who cannot be bothered with the detail, similar observations may be made for surface=paved vs surface=concrete etc. ...and what if we're mapping spaces? I'm not sure I'm on board with dividing things which are logically "one parking lot" into multiple areas for... questionable benefit at that point. (If the spaces are also mapped, the "where is the parking for X?" doesn't hold.) I think I want parking:capacity:motorcycle, and, while we're on the subject, parking:capacity:carry_out :-). (And also parking_space=motorcycle and parking_space=carry_out, naturally.) -- Matthew ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking
On 23/7/20 6:42 am, Matthew Woehlke wrote: On 22/07/2020 16.32, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am Mi., 22. Juli 2020 um 21:11 Uhr schrieb Matthew Woehlke: Right now the only option seems to be to model the lot as two separate entities, one which excludes the motorcycle spaces, and one which is *only* the motorcycle spaces which could be amenity=motorcycle_parking. Is this really the best way? I am usually doing it like this (separate entities), it also seems most useful for drivers / riders, because each group can see where are their parking lots. So... I'm not sure I agree with that. Maybe it's different in !US, but in the US, motorcycles can (generally) park in any car parking space. If we're going to use that argument, why do we have capacity:disabled, or indeed capacity:*, rather than modeling those spaces as separate lots? You asked for 'better' without defining what better means to you. To me it is 'better' to know where these things are (requires more work by the mapper) rather than that they are somewhere inside some area (requires less work by the mapper). Disabled parking to me is 'better' mapped as a separate thing, as is truck parking etc. While a motorcycle may legal park where a car parking space is the same cannot be said of a motorcycle parking space given the usual sized of the things. Tags may be available for those who cannot be bothered with the detail, similar observations may be made for surface=paved vs surface=concrete etc. ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking
sent from a phone > On 22. Jul 2020, at 22:42, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > > why do we have capacity:disabled, or indeed capacity:*, rather than modeling > those spaces as separate lots? because different mappers have different preferences. For disabled parking spaces I would also prefer having them mapped with their position. There’s amenity =parking_space for these Cheers Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking
On 22/07/2020 16.32, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Am Mi., 22. Juli 2020 um 21:11 Uhr schrieb Matthew Woehlke: Right now the only option seems to be to model the lot as two separate entities, one which excludes the motorcycle spaces, and one which is *only* the motorcycle spaces which could be amenity=motorcycle_parking. Is this really the best way? I am usually doing it like this (separate entities), it also seems most useful for drivers / riders, because each group can see where are their parking lots. So... I'm not sure I agree with that. Maybe it's different in !US, but in the US, motorcycles can (generally) park in any car parking space. If we're going to use that argument, why do we have capacity:disabled, or indeed capacity:*, rather than modeling those spaces as separate lots? -- Matthew ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking
Am Mi., 22. Juli 2020 um 21:11 Uhr schrieb Matthew Woehlke < mwoehlke.fl...@gmail.com>: > I've seen some parking lots that have spaces specifically for > motorcycles (i.e. that are not large enough for cars), although the lot > as a whole is mixed-use. Is there no "direct" way to tag this (something > like capacity:motorcycle)? > > Right now the only option seems to be to model the lot as two separate > entities, one which excludes the motorcycle spaces, and one which is > *only* the motorcycle spaces which could be amenity=motorcycle_parking. > Is this really the best way? I am usually doing it like this (separate entities), it also seems most useful for drivers / riders, because each group can see where are their parking lots. Cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
Re: [Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking
It would be advantageous to map them separately because one riding a motorcycle could make better use of OSM to navigate to and from the exact position of the applicable parking space. On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 9:11 PM Matthew Woehlke wrote: > I've seen some parking lots that have spaces specifically for > motorcycles (i.e. that are not large enough for cars), although the lot > as a whole is mixed-use. Is there no "direct" way to tag this (something > like capacity:motorcycle)? > > Right now the only option seems to be to model the lot as two separate > entities, one which excludes the motorcycle spaces, and one which is > *only* the motorcycle spaces which could be amenity=motorcycle_parking. > Is this really the best way? > > -- > Matthew > > ___ > Tagging mailing list > Tagging@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging > ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
[Tagging] Tagging motorcycle parking
I've seen some parking lots that have spaces specifically for motorcycles (i.e. that are not large enough for cars), although the lot as a whole is mixed-use. Is there no "direct" way to tag this (something like capacity:motorcycle)? Right now the only option seems to be to model the lot as two separate entities, one which excludes the motorcycle spaces, and one which is *only* the motorcycle spaces which could be amenity=motorcycle_parking. Is this really the best way? -- Matthew ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
