<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Dear tagging list,</p>
<p>looking on how to use the tag amenity=parking_space
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking_space">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking_space</a>)
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.</p>
<p>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: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/658526498">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/658526498</a></p>
<p>Searching for a reason for this requirement, I haven't found here
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?oldid=629318">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?oldid=629318</a>) a
specific one.</p>
<p>Looking here
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Site">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Site</a>), 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."</p>
<p>Should we maybe rephrase the sentence "Parking spaces <b>always
have to</b> be grouped together in a site relation tagged with
type=site + site=parking." in something like "Parking spaces <b>can</b>
be grouped together in a site relation tagged with type=site +
site=parking."?</p>
<p>Thank you for any comment,</p>
<p>Ale<br>
</p>
</body>
</html>