Dear tagging list,
looking on how to use the tag amenity=parking_space
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking_space) I've
always found the requirement that "parking spaces always have to be
grouped together in a site relation tagged with type=site +
site=parking" too complex and not really required by a general use case.
I can think about areas with maybe 10 amenity=parking_spaces and a
surrounding amenity=parking, where I don't see any strong need to
specify a relation to group the parking spaces together. Here an
example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/658526498
Searching for a reason for this requirement, I haven't found here
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?oldid=629318) a specific one.
Looking here
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Site), the
reason to use the relation seems to be quite lighter: "Parking sites -
useful for cases where parking entrances are mapped but parking area is
not yet mapped. Once parking is mapped as an area with service roads
marked site relation is no longer useful and may be safely deleted."
Should we maybe rephrase the sentence "Parking spaces *always have to*
be grouped together in a site relation tagged with type=site +
site=parking." in something like "Parking spaces *can* be grouped
together in a site relation tagged with type=site + site=parking."?
Thank you for any comment,
Ale
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
