Am Mo., 11. Mai 2020 um 11:45 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging < tagging@openstreetmap.org>:
> May 11, 2020, 10:06 by dieterdre...@gmail.com: > > On 11. May 2020, at 03:18, Jarek Piórkowski <ja...@piorkowski.ca> wrote: > > > Similarly if you were doing an analysis of surface area devoted to > public parking then you also need to know to check for > access!=private. > > > > this is indeed an unfortunate choice. Tagging a private access parking > with amenity=parking is similar to tagging the shower in your home as > amenity=shower or your kitchen sink as amenity=drinking_water. > > Not really. Private parking are worth mapping - it is stiil useful for > orientation, data analysis, > QA (private parkings vs unmapped) etc > right, but this doesn't mean it must have the same main tag, in particular "amenity" as key. For example we do not map private post boxes (your incoming mail) the same as those from the postal service for outgoing mail, although in the beginning there have been proponents to use amenity=post_box, access=private ;-) > > Tagging private showers, kitchens and toilets is unacceptable and should > be deleted if spotted. > > can you point to the rule? What would not be acceptable is tagging them like the amenities. Cheers Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
