On 14/08/2021 6:25 pm, Warin wrote:
On 14/8/21 4:45 pm, Michael Collinson wrote:
3. parking areas
This one can also be a bit confusing - following the wiki, some
of these
end up being service=parking_aisle, but others are without
service=* eg:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.80928/151.20897
<https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.80928/151.20897>
I imagine you can do in theory do an area query to establish
highway=service within amenity=parking, but this does seem clunky!
And not that we should be mapping for the renderer, but the
rendering
also seems inconsistent:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-33.80939/151.20923
<https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/-33.80939/151.20923>
If you can turn from the way directly into a parking spot, then it
should be parking aisle, so that one I think should be parking aisle.
Slightly different view here. I find that most car parks have
"arterial" ways for ingress/exit, navigation within larger parks, and
sometimes very local through "destination" traffic; obvious from
design or width. I don't put a parking_aisle on these. I think leads
to better map presentation and routing. In Melbourne, I find that many
car park service roads double up as useful bicycle connectors.
At least some of those "arterial" ways also have parking alongside them.
I would still mark those as parking aisle. Where there is not adjacent
parking then 'unclassified' would be my choice.
This comes down to what the purpose of the service=parking_aisle tag is.
Is it to distinguish major vs minor roads within a parking area -
because that's how it's handled by renderers and routers - or to say
where to find parking within a parking area.
I'm probably more with Michael Collinson on this one.
The parking aisle page on the wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:service%3Dparking_aisle
states one of the exclusions as:
"Forms the "trunk" or perimeter of the parking lot, connecting multiple
parking aisles – use highway=service without service=* instead. There
may be parking spaces on either side, but the roadway's primary purpose
is to get drivers to another part of the parking lot."
So if you go by the wiki, the presence of parking spaces doesn't not
automatically make it a parking aisle. It's about what you consider the
way's primary purpose is.
Here's an example of a classic trunk/spoke parking lot that has sections
of ways that are not parking_aisle:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.83561/151.06817
eg
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/368622450
But I certainly wouldn't split ways, and I'm fairly happy with the
tagging/presentation. You could probably also mount an argument to map
the circumference as highway=service without service=parking_aisle, but
that's probably where the subjectivity comes in.
These ones are all highway=service + service=parking_aisle. But I'm
happy again with the tagging/presentation.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.83906/151.07297
Here's one where most of the internal ways are parking aisle, but one
small section is not. This seems pointless to me.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.81030/151.00033
And this one definitely should be inverted:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=19/-33.85421/151.06761
cheers
Tom
----
Canyoning? try http://ozultimate.com/canyoning
Bushwalking? try http://bushwalkingnsw.com
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
