[Tagging] RFC: service=? for all highway=service (service=parking needed, primarily, I think)
ddean at ieee.org
Mon Aug 3 04:07:30 UTC 2020
Thanks for the great feedback, everyone.
Firstly, I don't want anyone to feel that just tagging highway=service is
wrong, and you have to have a service tag. Any information available on the
map is more useful than no information. I just want the ability to
differentiate between 'we don't know what sort of service road this is' and
'we know it is a main parking road and/or access within a private
On the main parking road, I think we are largely in agreement that
service=parking would be a good addition to OSM documentation (and is
already in use throughout the world, as such).
For the second type of highway=service with no service tagging, what about
It has been used about 1K times already (
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/WGY), and looks like it has been used in that
general 'access to facilities on a larger property/campus' sense.
For example: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/WGZ.
On Mon, 3 Aug 2020 at 08:31, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
> sent from a phone
> On 3. Aug 2020, at 00:18, Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefitz1 at gmail.com>
>> So what all these have in common is that they are not public roads not
>> intended for through-traffic. They are all on private/public properties.
>> So maybe they could be summarized under service=property, with a
>> description like "roads on (private) large properties, such as on
>> hospital grounds, cemeteries, camping grounds, industrial or commercial
> That's a nice idea!
> not all “service without additional subclass” are on properties, while
> most of those that already have additional subclasses like
> service=driveway/parking_aisle/drive_through etc. usually are. IMHO
> “property” would be misleading as qualifier for more important service roads
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging