stevagewp at gmail.com
Wed Dec 9 03:02:00 GMT 2009
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Cartinus <cartinus at xs4all.nl> wrote:
> I don't know where this nonsense comes from, but I don't have time to fix
> wiki tonight. I remember that when I had just joined OSM (late '07) there
> made some change to how either osm2pgsql or the mapnik stylesheet worked.
> This was specifically done to be able to map non-public carparks. The
> of it was that only carparks without an access tag or with access=public
> a blue "P".
Yeah, that rule doesn't make sense to me, as "access=permissive" should get
How about this:
parking=public (or no parking tag), presumably anyone can park here, perhaps
at a small fee.
parking=commercial: anyone can park here, it's a business.
parking=customer: anyone using the services of an associated organisation
can park. May require payment.
parking=authorised: you can park here only if authorised: staff member,
member of club, etc. Basically, you would need a prior arrangement.
I think the goal is to give broadly useful information rather than to map
all the subtle nuances. If I was driving somewhere and looking for a park, I
would first want to know about "parking=customer" locations, failing that,
"parking=public", failing that, "parking=commercial". It might even be
helpful to know about "parking=authorised" places, shown as a P with a cross
through or something, to know *not* to try and park there.
I wonder if there be some kind of "parking=private" for things like parking
spaces near apartment buildings, or spots inside company grounds, but there
may not be enough distinction against "authorised".
One question though: is this really the best use of the "parking=" tag? How
would you add information like motorcycle vs car parking,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging