<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>May 11, 2020, 10:06 by dieterdreist@gmail.com:<br></div><blockquote class="tutanota_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid #93A3B8; padding-left: 10px; margin-left: 5px;"><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>sent from a phone<br></div><blockquote><div>On 11. May 2020, at 03:18, Jarek Piórkowski <jarek@piorkowski.ca> wrote:<br></div><div><br></div><div>Similarly if you were doing an analysis of surface area devoted to<br></div><div>public parking then you also need to know to check for<br></div><div>access!=private.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>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. <br></div></blockquote><div>Not really. Private parking are worth mapping - it is stiil useful for orientation, data analysis, <br></div><div>QA (private parkings vs unmapped) etc<br></div><div><br></div><div>Tagging private showers, kitchens and toilets is unacceptable and should be deleted if spotted.<br></div><div><br></div><div>(note that some amenity=toilets + access=private should be retagged to access=customers<br></div><div>rather than deleted)<br></div> </body>
</html>