[Tagging] change bicycle_parking=floor to surface

[Peter Neale]

>Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 08:59:40 +0100>>From: Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>>>To: "Tag discussion, strategy and related tools">    <tagging at openstreetmap.org>>Subject: Re: [Tagging] change bicycle_parking=floor to surface>Message-ID: <8AA7582F-13D3-486C-9C47-87CA8A1F8F49 at gmail.com>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii>>>>sent from a phone>>> Il giorno 3 feb 2020, alle ore 04:32, John Willis via Tagging <tagging at openstreetmap.org> ha scritto:>>>> All of the other bicycle_parking values *imply an ability to lock your bike to some object*, but =ground_slots and =floor (and =surface) imply *do not*, because it is assumed that cyclists know about this already.>>>IMHO =surface does not imply anything on the presence of stands, but rather should be interpreted like parking=surface, as opposed to parking=underground/multi-storey.>>We should distinguish the type of parking and the kind of stands with different tags>>Cheers Martin>>
+1   
I agree that "surface" should be used to mean the same for bicycles as for cars (i.e. not underground, or multi-storey), perhaps with "covered=yes", if there is something to keep the rain or sun off.
If we want to show what security apparatus is provided, could we use "security={rail/post/hoop/lock_provided/whatever}"  ?
The tag "security" is currently used only 580 times and most values seem to be security company names.  I cannot find any wiki documentation for it, but using it to show the types of security device provided should not conflict with current usage.
Regards,Peter


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200203/905ebb0c/attachment.htm>