<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>I'm not sure if your first case
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg">https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg</a>) should be mapped as
parallel parking at all or if it's illegal parking and should
actually be no_parking or no_stopping (maybe depends on the local
legislation or permanence of the situation)? I recently discussed
a similar case with another mapper: Here it was about de facto
parallel parking in a living_street outside of designated parking
areas, which is illegal at least according to the traffic
regulations in force here (which is even indicated by a sign at
this street!). See this picture:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/0kZ-LZX4-J36J5xov_UBvw">https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/0kZ-LZX4-J36J5xov_UBvw</a><br>
<br>
In this situation I argued for "map what is on the ground" and for
mapping the situation as de facto parallel parking (the cars have
been parked there for years, as can be seen on aerial
photographs). My counterpart was against this. In the meantime,
the situation has been resolved by the fact that the public order
office has distributed parking tickets several times and the
street is no longer permanently, but only sporadically, parked :)<br>
<br>
But I am not sure whether there is a basic consensus on how to
deal with contradictions between de facto and de jure situations
like this in OSM? In my opinion, this should be clarified at
first.<br>
<br>
I am currently also working on parking lane analyses (see
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Supaplex030/Parkplatzanalyse_Neuk%C3%B6lln">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Supaplex030/Parkplatzanalyse_Neuk%C3%B6lln</a>,
sry for german language at present) and therefor differentiate
between (1) on_street, (2) half_on_street and (3)
on_kerb/shoulder/lay_by/street_side parking (for street side
parking see the current proposal under vote:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/parking%3Dstreet_side">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/parking%3Dstreet_side</a>).<br>
<br>
I think a distinction between "on_street" and "lane", as you
suggested, is unnecessary or too error-prone. Already when
differentiating between on_street (= lane) and street_side parking
I noticed that these cases are sometimes difficult to distinguish,
especially when there are kerb extensions. Wouldn't it be better
to simply distinguish between marked and unmarked parallel parking
lanes and work with width:* values
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:width#Width_of_streets">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:width#Width_of_streets</a>)
instead of lane information?</p>
<p>Cheers,<br>
Alex / Supaplex030</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 19.11.20 um 15:17 schrieb Tobias
Zwick:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:5ed14001-44ce-4718-410a-4f9513c50d7f@westnordost.de">Hello
all
<br>
<br>
First of all, in the past, we have explored many edge cases for
the lanes-tag in various discussions and I am happy that for the
most part, it seems to be quite well defined by now. However,
there is one edge case which is not uncommon at all but still
unclear or awkward to tag. Look at this:
<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg">https://westnordost.de/misc/2or1lanes.jpg</a>
<br>
<br>
It is a residential road marked clearly for 2 lanes, so it seems
obvious to tag it with lanes=2. But on the other hand, you'll
notice that there are parking cars on the right side that
effectively render the right lane unusable. These parking cars
would (currently) be tagged I believe as
<br>
<br>
parking:lane:right=parallel
<br>
parking:lane:right:parallel=on_street
<br>
<br>
And the wiki states
<br>
<br>
> And the following lanes should be excluded:
<br>
> [...] Parking lanes [...]
<br>
<br>
So here is an ambiguity in the documentation. On the one hand, if
the road has marked lanes, the number of marked lanes should be
tagged, on the other hand, there are these kind of "parking lanes"
which do not have their own space marked as a parking lane but
simply absorb the space assigned to normal car traffic. In OSM
tagging, these are also "parking:lane"s as far as I know.
<br>
<br>
We need to dissolve this ambiguity by defining a way how to
distinguish between these two cases:
<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png">https://westnordost.de/misc/parallel_parking_lane.png</a>
<br>
(1) a dedicated parallel parking lane. This lane should not count
as a lane in the lanes-tag.
<br>
(2) (parallel) parking is allowed (and used). This should be
irrelevant for the lane count.
<br>
<br>
My suggestion would be
<br>
(1) parking:lane:*:parallel = lane
<br>
(2) parking:lane:*:parallel = on_street
<br>
<br>
Maybe especially those who recently involved themselves with
parking lane tagging out and about and its documentation could
also state their point of view here. According to the wiki edit
history, looks like at least Mateusz Konieczny, Supaplex030 and
Minh Nguyễn were active.
<br>
What do you think?
<br>
<br>
There is also at least one data consumer I know about that is
using parking lane information and displays it visually,
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/dabreegster/abstreet">https://github.com/dabreegster/abstreet</a> it would be good to know
how they interpret and visualize the data.
<br>
<br>
Cheers
<br>
Tobias
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
Tagging mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>