[Tagging] Amenity parking

Simone Saviolo simone.saviolo at gmail.com
Wed Jan 11 22:51:22 GMT 2012

2012/1/11 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>:
> 2012/1/11 Erik Johansson <erjohan at gmail.com>:
>> I will gladly change my amenity=parking to what ever you decide. Does
>> access=private work? The parking lots aren't private it's just that
>> you can't park there.
> access=private doesn't say that something is private, it means that
> the right to access is private / given on an individual basis. Current
> tagging practice (access=private AFAIK, also rendered differently in
> Mapnik) does indeed seem wrong if you can access the parking (e.g. you
> can cross it on foot or bike) but cannot park there.

Er, sorry? It seems to me that access=private is exactly what is
needed, and your own definition falls into place easily: the stall is
phisically accessible, but the right to access is private. The fact
that you can walk on it is irrelevant: actually, since it's a parking,
it should be interdicted from traffic (ok, walking is not a good
example, but for example you shouldn't drive your car through it).

> cheers,
> Martin



More information about the Tagging mailing list