On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 19:58, Volker Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote: > I think that a space that you rent as an open-air garage on a monthly basis, > cannot be considered an amenity "car parking". If you put these on the map > you are really creating confusion for the map users (= car drivers). > I would not map these facilities as car parking ( ... and don't have any > better alternative either) >
On the first line of amenity=parking: it says "A parking lot is an area reserved for parking cars, trucks, motorcycles etc." Which is a broad and in my opinion good way to describe something: include everything by default. (See problems with natural=tree). Further down it says "A default amenity=parking means a free public parking lot on surface." So it's as coherent as a wiki should be.. :-) And makes me think that there will be lots of bad data.. There are two problems, neither which has been addressed. 1. how should different types of parking spaces be tagged 2. how should the existing amenity=parking be handled I will gladly change my amenity=parking to what ever you decide. Does access=private work? The parking lots aren't private it's just that you can't park there. _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
