2012/1/11 Martin Koppenhoefer <[email protected]>: > 2012/1/11 Erik Johansson <[email protected]>: >> 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. > > > access=private doesn't say that something is private, it means that > the right to access is private / given on an individual basis. Current > tagging practice (access=private AFAIK, also rendered differently in > Mapnik) does indeed seem wrong if you can access the parking (e.g. you > can cross it on foot or bike) but cannot park there.
Er, sorry? It seems to me that access=private is exactly what is needed, and your own definition falls into place easily: the stall is phisically accessible, but the right to access is private. The fact that you can walk on it is irrelevant: actually, since it's a parking, it should be interdicted from traffic (ok, walking is not a good example, but for example you shouldn't drive your car through it). > cheers, > Martin Ciao, Simone _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
