Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

Overall - it seems that we reached some consensus here and there is no need for proposal, although this thread got lengthy. Please let me know in next couple of days if anyone thinks proposal would be better way. Jan - I wanted to use "maxstay" as it is more common than "stay" today. But, what

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

On 20.10.20 22:43, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: I am not usually mapping this detail of parking fees, but from my understanding the above suggested tags would work and could be seen as covered by current state of tagging, no need for a proposal, just use it.

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

On 20/10/2020 16.34, Branko Kokanovic wrote: There are lot of parking lots on amenities (shopping malls...), where parking is free for customers, but only if you park for less than some specified time amount (let's say 2-3h), imposed by that amenity. After that period, you have to pay[1]. It is

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

Couple of other versions of restricted parking Customer's only or else: https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-28.0752577,153.4231834,3a,41.8y,100.24h,86.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swWpsJAcwaHpNkJm8KuoXFQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 & customers only with a time limit per day!

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

sent from a phone > On 21. Oct 2020, at 10:59, stevea wrote: > What I mean by towing_penalty=yes is that it is POSSIBLE that you might get > towed if you exceed the maxstay (or a semantic otherwise > interpretable-from-the-tags). What I mean by towing_penalty=no is that the > particular

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

On Wednesday, 21 October 2020, Andrew Harvey wrote: > On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 20:20, Philip Barnes wrote: > > > On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 20:04 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 19:45, Robert Delmenico wrote: > > > > Ballarat in Victoria has kerb side parking where

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 20:20, Philip Barnes wrote: > On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 20:04 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > > > On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 19:45, Robert Delmenico wrote: > > Ballarat in Victoria has kerb side parking where the first hour is free. > > There is some more information available

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

disc appears at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:parking:lane with proposed tag a parking:condition:*:maxstay=2 h with * replace by left/right/both depending on side Oct 21, 2020, 11:04 by andrew.harv...@gmail.com: > > > On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 19:45, Robert Delmenico <>

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 20:10 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: > On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 19:32, stevea > wrote: > > In California, a common (not quite frequent, certainly not always) > > arrangement at malls, supermarkets and other places with parking > > lots (large and small) is a sign that reads "you

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 20:04 +1100, Andrew Harvey wrote: > On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 19:45, Robert Delmenico > wrote: > > Ballarat in Victoria has kerb side parking where the first hour is > > free. > > There is some more information available here: > > > >

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 19:32, stevea wrote: > In California, a common (not quite frequent, certainly not always) > arrangement at malls, supermarkets and other places with parking lots > (large and small) is a sign that reads "you can park here for three hours, > but after that we have the right

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 19:45, Robert Delmenico wrote: > Ballarat in Victoria has kerb side parking where the first hour is free. > > There is some more information available here: > > >

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

On Oct 21, 2020, at 1:43 AM, Peter Elderson wrote: > towing_penalty=no means your car is towed away for free? In Nederland, towing > always comes with a penalty, even if you don't want your car back. > > Maybe a tag for consequences should be introduced. I suggest or_else=cargone. What I mean

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

towing_penalty=no means your car is towed away for free? In Nederland, towing always comes with a penalty, even if you don't want your car back. Maybe a tag for consequences should be introduced. I suggest or_else=cargone. Best, Peter Elderson > Op 21 okt. 2020 om 10:32 heeft stevea het >

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

Ballarat in Victoria has kerb side parking where the first hour is free. There is some more information available here: https://www.ballarat.vic.gov.au/city/parking/smarter-parking-ballarat#:~:text=Your%20first%20hour%20of%20parking,the%20Central%20Square%20car%20park%20 . Regards, Rob On

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

In California, a common (not quite frequent, certainly not always) arrangement at malls, supermarkets and other places with parking lots (large and small) is a sign that reads "you can park here for three hours, but after that we have the right to tow your car away." (Sometimes punctuated with

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

I have the opposite conclusion about fee=yes/no. These are free-to-use short-term car parks that have a clause to prevent people from 'misusing' them for office parking, etc. I would expect a free car park to be fee=no + a warning of charge after long stay. On Wed, 21 Oct 2020, 00:01 Andrew

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

I agree these are very common arrangements. On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 at 07:46, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > I am not usually mapping this detail of parking fees, but from my > understanding the above suggested tags would work and could be seen as > covered by current state of tagging, no need for a

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

I think that in this case full blown  proposal would be waste of time. Whatever maxstay/time/whatever keyword is used result should be fine. We just need to document it (add to examples list on conditional restrictions page, maybe also on fee page and parking page). I would just wait for

Re: [Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

I am not usually mapping this detail of parking fees, but from my understanding the above suggested tags would work and could be seen as covered by current state of tagging, no need for a proposal, just use it. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/fee%3Aconditional#values as a note, I believe

[Tagging] Parking fee only after some time period

Hi all, There are lot of parking lots on amenities (shopping malls...), where parking is free for customers, but only if you park for less than some specified time amount (let's say 2-3h), imposed by that amenity. After that period, you have to pay[1]. It is widespread where I live, but I would

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 23:47, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > On 26. Aug 2019, at 13:54, Paul Allen wrote: > > > > Third problem is that although the ones my local supermarket recently > installed have > > signs (which,so far, are being completely ignored) saying they are only > for charging,

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 08:53, Paul Allen wrote: > On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 at 23:35, Graeme Fitzpatrick > wrote: > >> >> A bit messy, but how about >> amenity=parking_space + access=vehicle_charging_only >> > > Big problem right there: you're expanding on the access tag. Some on this > list will >

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

sent from a phone > On 26. Aug 2019, at 13:54, Paul Allen wrote: > > Third problem is that although the ones my local supermarket recently > installed have > signs (which,so far, are being completely ignored) saying they are only for > charging, > in other places (particularly as charging

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

sent from a phone > On 26. Aug 2019, at 00:33, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > A bit messy, but how about > amenity=parking_space + access=vehicle_charging_only > car_charging=yes/no > truck_charging=yes/no > hgv_charging=yes/no Is it really „parking“? Maybe we should introduce an

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 01:37, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > amenity=charging _space? Says what it is. > First problem is that goes against the design of amenity=parking_space. Somebody will then decide to have amenity=disabled_parking_space rather than use the appropriate subtag with

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

amenity=charging _space? Says what it is. On 26/08/19 08:52, Paul Allen wrote: On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 at 23:35, Graeme Fitzpatrick mailto:graemefi...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 at 23:53, Paul Allen mailto:pla16...@gmail.com>> wrote: So it looks like, for the charging

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 at 23:35, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: > > > On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 at 23:53, Paul Allen wrote: > >> >> So it looks like, for the charging spaces, amenity=parking_space + >> access:= is the way >> to go. >> > > A bit messy, but how about > amenity=parking_space +

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 at 23:53, Paul Allen wrote: > > So it looks like, for the charging spaces, amenity=parking_space + > access:= is the way > to go. > A bit messy, but how about amenity=parking_space + access=vehicle_charging_only car_charging=yes/no truck_charging=yes/no hgv_charging=yes/no

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 at 15:05, yo paseopor wrote: > > amenity=parking_spaces > capacity=1 or 2 or 3 > access=customers > Nothing I've read states that only customers can use it, or that there is any time limit imposed. I think they're assuming that nobody is going to drive there just to charge

Re: [Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

Here in Spain chargers like this are used by motor_vehicles but forget about it, because before they have to be clients. I think this would be best definition for access. But also I will use other key to specify they have to be charging. You can find other places where charging would be not

[Tagging] Parking spaces for car charging

My local supermarket recently added two car charging stations. Each charging station took over three existing parking spaces. This is apparently a nation-wide roll-out by the supermarket chain, so this is going to apply to many places in the UK. It's also a likely arrangement of other charging

Re: [Tagging] Parking Fees

sent from a phone > On 24. Mar 2018, at 13:19, Philip Barnes wrote: > > I would avoid mapping the actual fee as that is very volatile. as a data consumer you can always decide to treat any fee as “yes” or potentially outdated (and you’ll loose nothing compared to

Re: [Tagging] Parking Fees

On Sat, 2018-03-24 at 06:28 +, Jonathan wrote: > Sorry I phrased my question poorly. Does anyone have an example on > OSM of parking tagged with parking fees that vary over time? So I can > see the tags used.  I think the tag you are looking for is fee:conditional, lots of usage in Germany but

Re: [Tagging] Parking Fees

Not an expert, but I think you'll need a combination of tags: - fee or fee:conditional to express fixed time intervals [1] [2] - maxstay to express the maximum allowed stay within the fee period [3] - charge to express the fee amount [4] Querying with overpass-turbo for nodes

Re: [Tagging] Parking Fees

Subject: Re: [Tagging] Parking Fees I just parked in the Triangle Parking for the UW Medical Center in Seattle, WA. The first 30 minutes are free. They also have a flat rate after 5pm of $5.00 although it's not listed on their website. https://www.uwmedicine.org/uw-medical-center/campus/directions

Re: [Tagging] Parking Fees

I just parked in the Triangle Parking for the UW Medical Center in Seattle, WA. The first 30 minutes are free. They also have a flat rate after 5pm of $5.00 although it's not listed on their website. https://www.uwmedicine.org/uw-medical-center/campus/directions There are a number of parking

[Tagging] Parking Fees

Can anyone point me in the direction of a car park example with a parking fee that is time dependant, such as first three hours free then next hour £2 .. Thanks Jonathan http://bigfatfrog67.me ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

[Tagging] Parking meters

How do parking meters fit in to the parking:condition tagging scheme? ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

[Tagging] parking for motorcycles AND bicycles

We have: amenity=parking (which assumes cars as vehicles) amenity=motorcycle_parking amenity=bicycle_parking We are apparently lacking a proper tag for mixed bicycle and motorbicycle parking. What about amenity=parking motorcar=no motorcycle=yes bicycle=yes ?

Re: [Tagging] parking for motorcycles AND bicycles

We already have something similar in amenity=parking hiking=yes ski=yes in order to indicate that a parking is mostly used for people who go hiking and/or skiing. I.e. not for parking of boots and skis... In other words, if you use bicycle=yes it may not be obvious whether it is: * a

Re: [Tagging] parking conditions

Am Freitag, den 03.01.2014, 20:18 -0500 schrieb Richard Welty: On 1/3/14 8:10 PM, One Hwang wrote: Suppose I wanted to tag to show that parking is prohibited on north side of Street X. Should I use parking:lane:right or parking:lane:left? that depends on what the direction of the way

[Tagging] parking conditions

Hi, I want to add the following on-street parking data in Newton, Massachusetts: Acacia Avenue - Prohibited, west side, Monday through Saturday, 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. I am confused about how to apply a parking tag for the west side. Although there are tags called parking:lane:right and

Re: [Tagging] parking conditions

On 1/3/14 7:58 PM, One Hwang wrote: I am confused about how to apply a parking tag for the west side. Although there are tags called parking:lane:right and parking:lane:left, I am not sure whether west should be considered left or right. I plan to work with a number of citizens from Newton

Re: [Tagging] parking conditions

Suppose I wanted to tag to show that parking is prohibited on north side of Street X. Should I use parking:lane:right or parking:lane:left? Thanks. On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 8:05 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.netwrote: On 1/3/14 7:58 PM, One Hwang wrote: I am confused about how to

Re: [Tagging] parking conditions

On 1/3/14 8:10 PM, One Hwang wrote: Suppose I wanted to tag to show that parking is prohibited on north side of Street X. Should I use parking:lane:right or parking:lane:left? that depends on what the direction of the way representing Street X is within OSM. which means that you can't make that

Re: [Tagging] parking conditions

Oh, that makes so much more sense now! The left/right tags have always confused me, but thanks for clarifying to someone who has been a mapper for nearly 3 years. -Compdude On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.netwrote: On 1/3/14 7:58 PM, One Hwang wrote: I am

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Am 03.05.2011 um 11:56 schrieb Stefan Bethke: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Car_access_tag I've updated the draft with concrete verbiage to be added/changed on the access and Map features pages. Stefan -- Stefan Bethke s...@lassitu.de Fon +49 151 14070811

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Am 29.04.2011 22:18, schrieb Stefan Bethke: It appears that people have been using car as a key for this purpose. Should I use that, and add an appropriate entry below motorcar=*? There is clearly a key needed for this class of vehicles, so why not just use car.

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

2011/5/1 David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au: On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 02:10 +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote: If I was towing a caravan, I wouldnt set my navigation device to think Im in a car or a motorbike, Id most probably use hgv. this thread is not about hacking your system so that it does

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Am 01.05.2011 um 13:14 schrieb Sebastian Hohmann: Am 29.04.2011 22:18, schrieb Stefan Bethke: It appears that people have been using car as a key for this purpose. Should I use that, and add an appropriate entry below motorcar=*? There is clearly a key needed for this class of vehicles,

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Am 01.05.2011 15:13, schrieb Stefan Bethke: Am 01.05.2011 um 13:14 schrieb Sebastian Hohmann: Am 29.04.2011 22:18, schrieb Stefan Bethke: It appears that people have been using car as a key for this purpose. Should I use that, and add an appropriate entry below motorcar=*? There is

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

2011/4/29 Stefan Bethke s...@lassitu.de: It appears that people have been using car as a key for this purpose.   Should I use that, and add an appropriate entry below motorcar=*? -1 IMHO motorcar should be defined as automobile/car, and not be used as a generic term including busses, hgv,

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Am 30.04.2011 12:10, schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer: 2011/4/29 Stefan Bethkes...@lassitu.de: It appears that people have been using car as a key for this purpose. Should I use that, and add an appropriate entry below motorcar=*? -1 IMHO motorcar should be defined as automobile/car, and not be

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

2011/4/30 Sebastian Hohmann m...@s-hohmann.de: Am 30.04.2011 12:10, schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer: motorcar is supposed to represent the class of Zeichen 251 (shows a car from the front), which forbids all double-tracked motor vehicles (which includes hgv and buses etc). this is how I see this

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Am 30.04.2011 um 12:10 schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer: I'd also like to point at motor_vehicle which doesn't seem to be defined reasonably (it includes all vehicles with a motor, like mofas and mopeds with 25 / 50 ccm motors). All definitions we're talking about apply to highways and similar

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Am 30.04.2011 um 13:08 schrieb Sebastian Hohmann: motorcar is supposed to represent the class of Zeichen 251 (shows a car from the front), which forbids all double-tracked motor vehicles (which includes hgv and buses etc). car is supposed to represent the class of Zusatzzeichen 1048-10

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Am 30.04.2011 um 12:10 schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer: 2011/4/29 Stefan Bethke s...@lassitu.de: It appears that people have been using car as a key for this purpose. Should I use that, and add an appropriate entry below motorcar=*? -1 IMHO motorcar should be defined as automobile/car, and

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Am 30.04.2011 um 15:10 schrieb Stefan Bethke: Am 30.04.2011 um 12:10 schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer: 2011/4/29 Stefan Bethke s...@lassitu.de: It appears that people have been using car as a key for this purpose. Should I use that, and add an appropriate entry below motorcar=*? -1 IMHO

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

On Sat, 2011-04-30 at 15:10 +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote: Am 30.04.2011 um 12:10 schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer: 2011/4/29 Stefan Bethke s...@lassitu.de: It appears that people have been using car as a key for this purpose. Should I use that, and add an appropriate entry below motorcar=*?

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Am 30.04.2011 16:51, schrieb David Murn: On Sat, 2011-04-30 at 15:10 +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote: Am 30.04.2011 um 12:10 schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer: 2011/4/29 Stefan Bethkes...@lassitu.de: It appears that people have been using car as a key for this purpose. Should I use that, and add an

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

2011/4/30 Stefan Bethke s...@lassitu.de: And if you feel you need more classifications, here's a Wikipedia article on the EU classification: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/EG-Fahrzeugklasse (seems there's no English version) There is no English version of this, and it seems to deal only with

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Am 30.04.2011 um 16:51 schrieb David Murn: On Sat, 2011-04-30 at 15:10 +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote: Am 30.04.2011 um 12:10 schrieb M∡rtin Koppenhoefer: 2011/4/29 Stefan Bethke s...@lassitu.de: It appears that people have been using car as a key for this purpose. Should I use that, and add

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

On 4/30/2011 6:56 PM, Stefan Bethke wrote: My concrete problem is a parking lot that only cars are allowed to use, but not trucks nor busses (technically, parking is allowed for two track vehicles with no trailers, not exceeding a gross mass of 3.5 tonnes). Reading the Key:access page, I did

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

On Sat, 2011-04-30 at 17:08 +0200, Sebastian Hohmann wrote: But don't forget bicycle=yes, foot=yes, horse=yes, skating=yes, dog=yes, ... But is bicycle/horse/skate/dog parking allowed? This is a discussion of how to tag limited access to parking, in which case you dont need to say what IS

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Am 01.05.2011 um 01:27 schrieb David Murn: On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 00:56 +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote: Maybe the alternative is to instead tag that its only suitable for single-tracked vehicles (ie. access=no motorbike=yes) rather than trying to figure out what isnt allowed? From how I read

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 02:10 +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote: hgv=no might or might not be understood to include busses, but it certainly would not imply cars with a trailer, or small caravans. If I was towing a caravan, I wouldnt set my navigation device to think Im in a car or a motorbike, Id most

[Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Trying to decypher the hierarchy of vehicles on the Key:access page, I cannot find a key that would allow me to tag a amenity=parking area as access=no, XXX=yes; where XXX would indicate access by regular cars as opposed to heavier or larger vehicles like busses, trucks and the like. It

Re: [Tagging] parking spaces limited to cars (no busses, trucks, etc.)

Am 29.04.2011 um 22:18 schrieb Stefan Bethke: Trying to decypher the hierarchy of vehicles on the Key:access page, I cannot find a key that would allow me to tag a amenity=parking area as access=no, XXX=yes; where XXX would indicate access by regular cars as opposed to heavier or larger

Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..

On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Phil! Gold phi...@pobox.com wrote: * Anthony o...@inbox.org [2010-05-18 20:47 -0400]: On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote: Almost all of these types of parking lots will have some kind of notice that tow-away is enforced for

Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: I propose to add the following to the Parking wiki page, in the table of the Tags section, as follows: (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Parking) Column Key: access Column Value: public/customer/private Column

Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..

Am 18.05.2010 09:13, schrieb Roy Wallace: On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Roy Wallacewaldo000...@gmail.com wrote: I propose to add the following to the Parking wiki page, in the table of the Tags section, as follows: (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Parking) Column Key: access Column

Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..

On 18 May 2010 17:23, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com wrote: Use access=permissive instead of access=customer and you get what's in use for years. I was thinking access=destination although then you need to link the parking lot to the destination, although you probably would for

Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..

2010/5/18 Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com: Use access=permissive instead of access=customer and you get what's in use for years. +1 cheers, Martin ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org

Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Ulf Lamping ulf.lamp...@googlemail.com wrote: Use access=permissive instead of access=customer and you get what's in use for years. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access says access=permissive means The owner gives general permission for access. This

Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..

Seventy 7 seven...@operamail.com writes: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access says access=permissive means The owner gives general permission for access. This doesn't seem consistent with parking restricted to customers. Do you think this is a problem? I think, if access=* is to mean

Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..

2010/5/19 Greg Troxel g...@ir.bbn.com: I would call the first access=destination and the second access=permissive. yes, by thinking it over I also see some space for a restriction between permissive and private and destination is more elegant cause it uses an already introduced value for

Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..

On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 6:57 AM, Seventy 7 seven...@operamail.com wrote: Use access=permissive instead of access=customer and you get what's in use for years. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access says access=permissive means The owner gives general permission for access. This doesn't

Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..

On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:11 AM, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote: Almost all of these types of parking lots will have some kind of notice that tow-away is enforced for unauthorized parking. So the general idea is you're free to park there, ONLY if you're visiting the businesses serviced by

[Tagging] Parking for businesses..

I was using the OSM maps for my city on my Garmin recently and when I listed the parking POIs I noticed a whole slew of parking showing up in there; mainly unnamed.. It got me thinking why those are in there but then it dawned on me that in my area I've started adding in the parking lots and

Re: [Tagging] Parking for businesses..

On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote: From http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Parking: The distinction between public parking lots, customer parking lots (such as at cinemas etc.), and private parking lots (such as for staff in a business park) is handled with

Re: [Tagging] Parking Lots

2010/5/16 Pieren pier...@gmail.com: +1 I submitted a ticket to revert this change : http://trac.openstreetmap.org/ticket/2970 Mapnik cannot display all tags and all information in OSM. Showing all private things will result of an unreadable map. It depends on the way the information is

Re: [Tagging] Parking Lots

On 16 May 2010 03:18, Serge Wroclawski emac...@gmail.com wrote: 2) We fix the definition of parking and change the renderer. #2 is my favorite solution, as it seems the most right. #3 is my least favorite solution, since it's all high quality data. A slight twist on #2, you add sub-tags.

Re: [Tagging] Parking Lots

Am 15.05.2010 19:18, Serge Wroclawski: 2) We fix the definition of parking and change the renderer. Redefining an established tag won't work. How will you ensure that the remaining... hundreds of thousands of occurances of amenity=parking comply to your new definition? So you should

Re: [Tagging] Parking Lots

On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Katie Filbert filbe...@gmail.com wrote: Regarding rendering, two weeks ago, a change was made to the Mapnik rendering: Yeah, I forgot to mention that, since the changeset I applied last night was assuming the old rules. - Serge

Re: [Tagging] Parking Lots

On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Claudius Henrichs claudiu...@gmx.de wrote: Am 15.05.2010 19:18, Serge Wroclawski: 2) We fix the definition of parking and change the renderer. Redefining an established tag won't work. How will you ensure that the remaining... hundreds of thousands of

Re: [Tagging] parking

I agree that useful is a good criteria, but there are times when authorised is not adequate. For example, different parking areas are authorized for different functional entities. Maybe I should know if my authrorization qualifies for a particular area, but there's a significant probability

Re: [Tagging] parking

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 6:02 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: In that case maybe we should continue trying to bend access to fit the purpose, This is not so wrong, imho, if access= means use is restricted to. Use for a road means driving, use for a parking lot means parking, use

Re: [Tagging] parking

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Roy Wallace waldo000...@gmail.com wrote: Ok, so it looks like we're back to access=destination then :). Well, access=destination was intended for roads that you can drive through, if you're going somewhere nearby, right? access=customer would be more intuitive,

Re: [Tagging] parking

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: Ok, so it looks like we're back to access=destination then :). Well, access=destination was intended for roads that you can drive through, if you're going somewhere nearby, right? access=customer would be more

Re: [Tagging] parking

Roy Wallace wrote: How should a parking lot be tagged, that is provided for customers, e.g. at a restaurant, or retail business? It may be signed as such (e.g. Customers only), or may not. I would add access=permissive. You can a note=* tag to describe it in more detail if you want. That

Re: [Tagging] parking

Matthias Julius li...@julius-net.net writes: Chris Hill o...@raggedred.net writes: Roy Wallace wrote: How should a parking lot be tagged, that is provided for customers, e.g. at a restaurant, or retail business? It may be signed as such (e.g. Customers only), or may not. I would add

Re: [Tagging] parking

Greg Troxel wrote: I think access=destination is natural and expresses concisely you can park here if you are visiting an associated business. streets with access=destination are really you can drive here if you are visting someplace near it - even if you typically park in someone's driveway

Re: [Tagging] parking

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Randy rwtnospam-new...@yahoo.com wrote: I think access=destination is natural and expresses concisely you can park here if you are visiting an associated business. ... That sounds good to me, as well. So... access=destination seems to have some support. My issue

Re: [Tagging] parking

2009/12/9 Randy rwtnospam-new...@yahoo.com: On further thought, while I'm OK with either approach, I think amenity=parking, parking=customer is a better way to go than bending access=destination to fit the issue. It seems a little closer to what seems to be a best practice in other areas.

Re: [Tagging] parking

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: How about this: parking=public (or no parking tag), presumably anyone can park here, perhaps at a small fee. parking=commercial: anyone can park here, it's a business. parking=customer: anyone using the services of an