Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

Am 01.03.2015 um 16:46 schrieb Jan van Bekkum: > I have adapted the proposal to reflect the results of this discussion. As long as there is not category for service-businesses I would use amenity=vehicle_storage as this is no shop but a service and shop=storage sounds like a super category for sho

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

I have adapted the proposal to reflect the results of this discussion. Met vriendelijke groet/with kind regards, *Jan van Bekkum* www.DeEinderVoorbij.nl On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 1:53 AM, johnw wrote: > > On Feb 24, 2015, at 2:26 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > > a restaurant doesn't "se

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

On 24/02/2015 4:26 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: 2015-02-22 0:27 GMT+01:00 John Willis >: Personally, it is confusing as all hell that some businesses that offer services for money are amenities and some are shops. I know the implication of shop is for sales

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

2015-02-22 0:27 GMT+01:00 John Willis : > Personally, it is confusing as all hell that some businesses that offer > services for money are amenities and some are shops. I know the implication > of shop is for sales of goods, but a restaurant sells food, and it is an > amenity. A bench is also an a

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

> On Feb 22, 2015, at 8:47 PM, Jan van Bekkum wrote: > > You never can do it fully correct: > The breakfast restaurant in a two-star hotel just for residents is an amenity > A restaurant in a five-star hotel has to be present to qualify the for five > stars, just like a gym, so it is an amenity

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

You never can do it fully correct: - The breakfast restaurant in a two-star hotel just for residents is an amenity - A restaurant in a five-star hotel has to be present to qualify the for five stars, just like a gym, so it is an amenity, although you have to pay separately for the s

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

shop=storage to me means a shop that sells bags, boxes .. stuff to store things in ... not the space to store stuff in. so shop=vehicle_storage would be better if it is to be shop=. http://www.garagen-klaus.de/files/garagegreif1_2.jpg __ openstreetmap.org/user/AndiG88 wiki.openstreetma

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

> > Me too. restaurant, fast_food, pub, restaurant, ice_cream, beer garden, cafe > and bar for example should be shop= not amenity .. for my thinking. +1 > > shop=storage to me means a shop that sells bags, boxes .. stuff to store > things in ... not the space to store stuff in. > In Amer

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

On 22/02/2015 10:27 AM, John Willis wrote: Sent from my iPhone On Feb 22, 2015, at 3:30 AM, John F. Eldredge > wrote: If the use of the vehicle storage is limited to certain people, such as residents of a particular neighborhood, use access tags as well. It then

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 22, 2015, at 3:30 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > > If the use of the vehicle storage is limited to certain people, such as > residents of a particular neighborhood, use access tags as well. It then > becomes the responsibility of the renderer to check these tags.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

So how does one differentiate between a common use lot that is private And a *shop* that offers that? Isn't there some need for the shop=* in some regard. Javbw > On Feb 22, 2015, at 3:30 AM, John F. Eldredge wrote: > > If the use of the vehicle storage is limited to certain people, such a

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

Storage and long term parking are subtly different - and LTP is definitely a part of parking. AFAIK, long term storage has the assumption that a: you are a traveller in some respect, and the amenity is usually near transportation facilities B: you will come back sometime, once possibly unspec

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Jan van Bekkum wrote: > Please have a look at this feature proposal > > . > One question I have is, would this be more for something like this storage lot I can't figure out how to map

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

Sure, but we need to show that you can't store a boat in a car storage. On Sat Feb 21 2015 at 7:32:25 PM John F. Eldredge wrote: > If the use of the vehicle storage is limited to certain people, such as > residents of a particular neighborhood, use access tags as well. It then > becomes the re

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

If the use of the vehicle storage is limited to certain people, such as residents of a particular neighborhood, use access tags as well. It then becomes the responsibility of the renderer to check these tags. -- John F. Eldredge -- j...@jfeldredge.com "Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only l

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 20, 2015, at 9:47 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer > wrote: > > > 2015-02-20 13:42 GMT+01:00 Jan van Bekkum : >> So it would become: >> shop=vehicle_storage >> covered=yes >> motorcar=yes >> caravan=yes > > > I wouldn't use the "shop" key but something like "amenity", a

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

2015-02-20 13:42 GMT+01:00 Jan van Bekkum : > So it would become: > shop=vehicle_storage > covered=yes > motorcar=yes > caravan=yes > I wouldn't use the "shop" key but something like "amenity", and "motorcar" is a legal access restriction, so should be something different as well. cheers, Marti

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

Thanks again, makes sense. What is the best way to map what vehicles the storage is intended for? motorcar=yes? Access=motorcar, access=caravan would duplicate the key So it would become: shop=vehicle_storage covered=yes motorcar=yes caravan=yes On Fri Feb 20 2015 at 9:35:09 AM johnw wrote: >

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

> On Feb 20, 2015, at 12:04 PM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 20/02/2015 1:22 PM, johnw wrote: >> I think he’s trying to say that “a storage amenity” is different from "a >> parking amenity”, because it is not something you would seek out on the map >> when looking for parking (ev

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

Thanks, this makes much sense. - I will update the proposal to use the key covered instead of different values for the type of storage - I will also change car to vehicle covering caravans, boats, etc. as well - I agree that amenity or shop would be better that parking as the ty

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 6:22 PM, johnw wrote: > I think he’s trying to say that “a storage amenity” is different from "a > parking amenity”, because it is not something you would seek out on the map > when looking for parking (even long term airport parking, i think) - but > rather something you’

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

On 20/02/2015 1:22 PM, johnw wrote: I think he’s trying to say that “a storage amenity” is different from "a parking amenity”, because it is not something you would seek out on the map when looking for parking (even long term airport parking, i think) - but rather something you’d seek out when

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

I think he’s trying to say that “a storage amenity” is different from "a parking amenity”, because it is not something you would seek out on the map when looking for parking (even long term airport parking, i think) - but rather something you’d seek out when looking for a storage facility for yo

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

Oh .. you want to determine if the parking is covered or not? then http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:covered and/or use the present values of the key parking= underground, sheds, carports, garage_boxes, multi-storey ? any other value or missing tags take as uncovered? Adds no tags .. jus

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

Would apply to travellers flying or going on a sea voyage for some time. The parking= key looks to give information on the physical layout of the parking - underground/ground level only, multi-story etc. So may not be the best place for this information? Would not the tag maxstay give some c

[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=storage: additional values for key parking

Please have a look at this feature proposal . *Jan van Bekkum* www.DeEinderVoorbij.nl ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo