[Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - parking=street_side

[Matthew Woehlke]

On 26/10/2020 15.19, Jeroen Hoek wrote:
> On 26-10-2020 19:31, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>> Alternatively, clients might look at the sort of highway running
>> through a parking area. A highway=tertiary is probably "street-side
>> parking", while a highway=service, service=parking_aisle probably is
>> not.
> 
> That's not a bad thought, but it would require connecting the
> street-side parking area to the highway (e.g., by extending the area to
> the middle of the carriage way), which goes against the principle of
> mapping what is there.

If parking is on both sides of the street, the parking area already 
crosses the street, and even if it doesn't, logically the parking area 
*does* connect to the street. I disagree with the argument that mapping 
thus is somehow "wrong", and indeed, I usually map parking that way.

The problem with the parking area potentially being misleading (which 
anyway is an issue of the consumer not considering how the adjacent 
highway infringes on the parking area) can be solved by also mapping the 
spaces.

> I don't think renderers tend to have this information available in
> any case.
Perhaps, but at that point we're tagging for the renderer. I was 
thinking of other clients (e.g. routers).

-- 
Matthew