"disabled" is not one of the access types documented on the wiki.

I would say setting capacity and capacity:disabled to the same value makes it 
clear already that the whole parking lot is only for disabled parking, and it 
follows a documented tagging scheme that relevant data consumers should already 
be processing correctly.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Willis <jo...@mac.com>
> Sent: Friday, 18 May 2018 13:59
> To: Tag discussion, strategy and related tools
> <tagging@openstreetmap.org>
> Subject: Re: [Tagging] access=disabled
> 
> 
> 
> Javbw
> 
> > On May 10, 2018, at 9:19 AM, Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm tagging a 'disabled parking area' - these are fairly common
> in my country.
> 
> I know I am just jumping in - but this is also something I am
> interested in.
> 
> I know if we have a big parking lot waiting the a few disabled
> spots along an isle near the store entrance, than
> capacity:disabled=4 added to a normal parking lot is appropriate.
> 
> But the instances I am trying to map are large disabled-only lots.
> They (sometimes) have a gate that the security guard opens,
> allowing anyone with a disabled plackerd to enter. It is a
> separately mappable lot near the normal access=customers. Most of
> them are physically separated from any other parking by kerbs and
> shrubs.
> 
> I really think access=disabled is appropriate for this parking lot.
> All others are denied.
> 
> Having to map space-by-space to just show that this *lot* is
> disabled-only seems weird.
> 
> Javbw
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging



_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

Reply via email to