It occurs to me that access is a differentiating feature. "Living streets" seem to be open to the public whereas the parking aisle in front of Bunnings or shared driveway of a block of units would (I think) be access=customers or access=private.
I agree with your view. And perhaps applicable access=* tags would also be useful. On Wed, 16 Feb 2022, at 11:41 PM, Dian Ågesson wrote: > Hello, > > I am increasingly encountering shared zone signs in carparks, driveways > and other minor service ways. The tagging guidelines suggest that > shared zones are the equivalent of a highway=living_street, but I’m not > sure that is the case. > > When Shared Zones are applied to shopping strips, residential courts, > etc, the Living Street tag seems appropriate. But, the parking aisle in > front of the Bunnings entrance, or the shared driveway of a block of > three units, doesn’t seem to fit. Even though it is a “shared zone”, it > definitely isn’t a living street like what Wikipedia describes. > > In my opinion, a service street that is a shared zone should not be > tagged as a living street, but should keep its service tag. > (Potentially with a pedestrian_priority=yes or shared_zone=yes tag) > > What does this group think of this? Would a change to the tagging > guidelines be appropriate? > > > > dian > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
