[Tagging] Why isn't the amenity=parking object part of the relation ?

[OSMDoudou]

Thx. Two follow-up questions.

(A)

I had a look at a place to which - if I'm not mistaken - you contributed to [1] and I see what you mean.

Still, I'm curious why we wouldn't use the "role" attributes of a relation to *explicitly* qualify the outer polygon as the "parent" of the parking spaces (and the other possible parking-related objects, if any).

As a was searching more, I saw in JOSM that when I click Presets > Relations > Site, it opens a dialog box which I think tries to explain that one can add nodes, ways or areas with role label, perimeter, entrance or just member (no role).

And indeed, when I start writing in the Role column in the relation editor dialog in JOSM, it will autocomplete when I start typing perimeter, label or entrance.

But I can't find discussion of that in the wiki. [2]

Although when searching even further the wiki, I found an explanation of role "perimeter" and "label". [3] [4]

So, it looks like one should tag the amenity=parking member in the relation with role perimeter.

What do you think ?

(B)

By the way, back to [1], I see tags from amenity=parking have been duplicated to the relation object.

I would have deleted the tags on amenity=parking to avoid double maintenance work.

Is that intended ?

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8448251
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/parking#Site_relation
[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Site_Perimeter
[4] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Label