<div dir="auto">Long time No. P. 0.....?pxo.llkjkt<div dir="auto"><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri 7 Aug 2020, 21:55 , <<a href="mailto:tagging-request@openstreetmap.org">tagging-request@openstreetmap.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Send Tagging mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:tagging-request@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging-request@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:tagging-owner@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging-owner@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of Tagging digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - more parking types (Tobias Knerr)<br>
2. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - more parking types (Tobias Knerr)<br>
3. Re: Electric scooter parking (Jan Michel)<br>
4. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - more parking types (Jan Michel)<br>
5. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - more parking types (Philip Barnes)<br>
6. Feature Proposal - RFC - Takeaway drinks shops (德泉 談)<br>
7. Re: Electric scooter parking (Matthew Woehlke)<br>
8. Re: Feature Proposal - RFC - more parking types (Matthew Woehlke)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 19:11:31 +0200<br>
From: Tobias Knerr <<a href="mailto:osm@tobias-knerr.de" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">osm@tobias-knerr.de</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - more parking types<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:d88f3172-6c18-1533-881f-2fbba4bd9b54@tobias-knerr.de" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">d88f3172-6c18-1533-881f-2fbba4bd9b54@tobias-knerr.de</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8<br>
<br>
On 06.08.20 22:52, Matthew Woehlke wrote:<br>
> <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/more_parking" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/more_parking</a><br>
<br>
I like it, thanks for working on this topic! Two suggestions:<br>
<br>
Could you add a short definition of "compact"? I can guess that it's<br>
supposed to mean parking spaces for compact cars, but the first Google<br>
result for me is some parking system for trucks at motorways. Better to<br>
avoid the ambiguity.<br>
<br>
Also, I guess we need to decide if we need to be able to map something<br>
that fits more than one class, like a takeaway parking spot reserved for<br>
users with disabilities. If so, we could consider a solution something<br>
like parking_space:takeaway=yes, or a clearly defined meaning for<br>
semicolon-separated values.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 19:13:24 +0200<br>
From: Tobias Knerr <<a href="mailto:osm@tobias-knerr.de" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">osm@tobias-knerr.de</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - more parking types<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:8741af4a-79d9-33f9-1cb6-3f09144458c9@tobias-knerr.de" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">8741af4a-79d9-33f9-1cb6-3f09144458c9@tobias-knerr.de</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8<br>
<br>
On 07.08.20 15:36, Matthew Woehlke wrote:<br>
> That said... now I'm on the fence. FWIW, the amenity=parking page<br>
> mentions parking_space=disabled as being supported by at least one<br>
> renderer, while one has to do quite some digging for how to use<br>
> access:*. Clearly we *do* need to improve the documentation here! Also,<br>
> it's less obvious how one would apply access restrictions for e.g.<br>
> charging, compact.<br>
<br>
I've always felt that using "disabled" as an access _key_ (i.e.<br>
disabled=* or access:disabled=*) was somewhat at odds with the usual<br>
logic of putting groups of users in the _value_ of access tags.<br>
<br>
I like that parking_space=disabled sidesteps this issue.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 3<br>
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 20:13:03 +0200<br>
From: Jan Michel <<a href="mailto:jan@mueschelsoft.de" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">jan@mueschelsoft.de</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Electric scooter parking<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:116a04ad-52ba-2c38-e3e9-675956709788@mueschelsoft.de" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">116a04ad-52ba-2c38-e3e9-675956709788@mueschelsoft.de</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed<br>
<br>
On 07.08.20 19:09, Paul Johnson wrote:<br>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 12:00 PM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <br>
> <<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a> <br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>>> wrote:<br>
> Aug 7, 2020, 18:05 by <a href="mailto:baloo@ursamundi.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">baloo@ursamundi.org</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:baloo@ursamundi.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">baloo@ursamundi.org</a>>:<br>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 3:27 AM Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging<br>
> <<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>>><br>
> wrote:<br>
> amenity=parking + vehicle=no + electric_scooter=yes<br>
> seems like a terrible idea to me<br>
> Why? That's actually pretty good. amenity=parking is for motor<br>
> vehicle parking, electric scooters are a part of that.<br>
> Mostly because it will break all current users of amenity=parking<br>
> and at least for me place to place<br>
> electric scooter is not the same object as a car parking (in the<br>
> same way as bicycle parking<br>
> is not the same object as a car parking).<br>
> I feel like a data consumer unable to deal with access tagging is <br>
> already broken in advance.<br>
<br>
+1 from my side.<br>
<br>
It might be useful to have two different top-level amenity tags for <br>
parking lots for large and small vehicles, but not one tag for every <br>
type of vehicle.<br>
<br>
Any new tagging scheme must be able to support parking lots that are <br>
dedicated to several types of vehicles - at least those of similar size.<br>
We must be able to tag a shared motorcycle/moped/electric scooter <br>
parking area.<br>
<br>
If we really need a new top-level tag, it has to be something like<br>
*amenity=small_vehicle_parking* and comprise all of motorcycles, moped, <br>
mofa, speed_pedelec, scooters (of any kind) and so on. Further details <br>
could then be given by access tags to specify which kind of vehicles can <br>
be parked there.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 4<br>
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 20:17:12 +0200<br>
From: Jan Michel <<a href="mailto:jan@mueschelsoft.de" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">jan@mueschelsoft.de</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - more parking types<br>
Message-ID: <rgk5r8$in1$<a href="mailto:1@ciao.gmane.io" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">1@ciao.gmane.io</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed<br>
<br>
On 07.08.20 19:11, Tobias Knerr wrote:<br>
> On 06.08.20 22:52, Matthew Woehlke wrote:<br>
>> <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/more_parking" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/more_parking</a><br>
> I like it, thanks for working on this topic! Two suggestions:<br>
> <br>
> Could you add a short definition of "compact"? I can guess that it's<br>
> supposed to mean parking spaces for compact cars,<br>
<br>
You also have to keep in mind that what a 'compact car' is strongly <br>
depends on the region. What counts as 'compact' in the US is a 'regular <br>
sized' car in Europe and is a 'large' car in densly populated areas like <br>
Tokyo.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 5<br>
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2020 19:39:37 +0100<br>
From: Philip Barnes <<a href="mailto:phil@trigpoint.me.uk" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">phil@trigpoint.me.uk</a>><br>
To: <a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - more parking types<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a href="mailto:561c594960bd61730e14575e258ac2b094a86823.camel@trigpoint.me.uk" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">561c594960bd61730e14575e258ac2b094a86823.camel@trigpoint.me.uk</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
On Fri, 2020-08-07 at 15:09 +0100, Jez Nicholson wrote:<br>
> I saw parking_space=takeaway riding on the coattails of the original<br>
> post....is this not a waiting time restriction? Does it merit its own<br>
> value? Perhaps I'm against it because we don't AFAIK have these in<br>
> the UK?<br>
<br>
I am not 100% sure but McDonalds that have a drive through have special<br>
spaces where you are told to wait if your order is taking a long time<br>
to clear the queue. Is that what this means?<br>
<br>
We also have loading bays where you can stop for a few minutes to<br>
collect things you have bought and cannot carry to the car park, there<br>
is no specific time limit here but you are expected to not be far away.<br>
Again is that what this means.<br>
<br>
Phil (trigpoint)<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200807/ff4082d4/attachment-0001.htm" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200807/ff4082d4/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 6<br>
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 18:59:04 +0000 (UTC)<br>
From: 德泉 談 <<a href="mailto:tran0408tran0408t@yahoo.com.tw" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tran0408tran0408t@yahoo.com.tw</a>><br>
To: "<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>><br>
Subject: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Takeaway drinks shops<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:2094538961.1013874.1596826744569@mail.yahoo.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">2094538961.1013874.1596826744569@mail.yahoo.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8<br>
<br>
Hello<br>
<br>
Sorry for pause the bubble tea proposal for a month due to my personal reason.<br>
<br>
In the discussion in June and July some people think the tag for bubble tea is too specific but there is a flaw in existing tags, so I made a new draft for containing more type of takeaway beverages shops, and it's still unsure whether use amenity=* or shop=*.<br>
<br>
Please comment and help me to complete the proposal, thanks.<br>
<br>
Tan<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 7<br>
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 15:47:37 -0400<br>
From: Matthew Woehlke <<a href="mailto:mwoehlke.floss@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">mwoehlke.floss@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"<br>
<<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>>, Jan Michel <<a href="mailto:jan@mueschelsoft.de" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">jan@mueschelsoft.de</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Electric scooter parking<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:f7acbf70-fa2d-d130-0e95-5cd25b8d694b@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">f7acbf70-fa2d-d130-0e95-5cd25b8d694b@gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed<br>
<br>
On 07/08/2020 11.55, Jan Michel wrote:<br>
> Note that we also lack a proper way to tag parking lots for trucks.<br>
<br>
This sounds like a good candidate for expanding capacity:* / <br>
parking_space=*, at least in the case of mixed-use lots. In general, I <br>
agree it would be good to have a better way to tag parking areas for <br>
specific vehicle types.<br>
<br>
BTW, how are hitching rails (i.e. "horse parking") mapped? ;-)<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Matthew<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 8<br>
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2020 15:54:56 -0400<br>
From: Matthew Woehlke <<a href="mailto:mwoehlke.floss@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">mwoehlke.floss@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools"<br>
<<a href="mailto:tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>>, Philip Barnes <<a href="mailto:phil@trigpoint.me.uk" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">phil@trigpoint.me.uk</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - more parking types<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:b2c15d1e-4394-fa63-0285-4117caaf6fc1@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">b2c15d1e-4394-fa63-0285-4117caaf6fc1@gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed<br>
<br>
On 07/08/2020 14.39, Philip Barnes wrote:<br>
> I am not 100% sure but McDonalds that have a drive through have special<br>
> spaces where you are told to wait if your order is taking a long time<br>
> to clear the queue. Is that what this means?<br>
<br>
"No", because those are not *parking* spaces as was previously <br>
discussed. (Um... not sure where, possibly in one of the threads linked <br>
in the proposal.) OTOH *I* wouldn't be adverse to overloading it with <br>
that meaning, but technically speaking such spaces are not *parking* <br>
spaces, because you are not supposed to park in them. (Note the <br>
difference between "parking", "standing" and "stopping". You are <br>
supposed to *stop* in them, but not *park*.)<br>
<br>
> We also have loading bays where you can stop for a few minutes to<br>
> collect things you have bought and cannot carry to the car park, there<br>
> is no specific time limit here but you are expected to not be far away.<br>
> Again is that what this means.<br>
<br>
That is explicitly "standing". Previous comments apply.<br>
<br>
Again, the *intended* use is for *parking* spaces (park, go inside, <br>
collect a to-go order, possibly *order* a to-go order and wait for it to <br>
be made... but don't sit down and eat at the restaurant). However *I* <br>
would not object to using it for any sort of parking/standing/stopping <br>
space where you are expected to not be long (and the space is <br>
specifically signed with something like "loading only") but there is not <br>
a specific time limit. Others might object, however. (Probably on the <br>
basis that this is not "parking", on which point they *are* technically <br>
correct.)<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Matthew<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Subject: Digest Footer<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
End of Tagging Digest, Vol 131, Issue 49<br>
****************************************<br>
</blockquote></div>