On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:29 AM, Bryce Nesbitt <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 1:20 AM, Paul Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:13 AM, Bryce Nesbitt <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> A caravan site might have 200 private hookups. We don't want the hookups >>> to be rendered at the same level as the central dump station. >>> Backyard dump stations should render even less prominently, if they are >>> even mapped at all. >>> >> >> Let's not forget that tagging isn't the renderer. If a renderer can't >> dim or hide access=private on such a POI when it's not desirable to display >> a private sanidump, it's the renderer, not the tagging, that's broken. >> > > Let's not forget that humans are mappers. The shared sanidump at the > local caravan site might well get tagged access=private. > That's something that can be fixed. > Or maybe access=private will be used for the per site hookups. > Right (or customers). > *The cases seem to be:* > private backyard dump stations. > per-site hookup, available only to registered residents (at a long term > residential trailer park or dock). > per-site hookup, available only to registered guests at a leisure > destination > access=private for all three. > shared dump station, available only to guests of the destination > access=customers > shared dump station, available for drive up/boat up use. > shared dump station, free. > access=yes (or just no access tag at all). > *Tagged on:* > Way/node > As a tagged property of a mapped place (e.g. campground, store, fuel > station), without a specific position. > Probably not as this is almost certainly too vague. > As a tagged property of a numbered slot (e.g. sites 1-22 offer per-site > hookups). > Reasonable, as it's often hard to get high enough imagery to narrow it down further and most people (I'm certainly not and I probably care more than most) aren't likely to break out the theodolite and start doing trig... > Each of those cases needs clear tags if we hope mappers to use them > consistently. Your suggestions? > I think not trying to redefine access=* for just this situation is a start.
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
