[OSM-talk-be] Road side parking ( Was Re: Overdreven gedetailleerde mapping ?)

[Marc Gemis]

So for those 4 roadside parking spaces: https://osm.org/go/0EpBwBaxP?m=
I have to split the road a couple of times, add some 3 or 4 parking
lane tags to indicate it is somehow on both sides, parallel parking in
marked spots? And I wouldn't be able to add the capacity in the end.

While adding 4 rectangles with tag amenity=parking_space express the same?

For me, there is definitely improvement possible in the tagging schema
for such situations.

m.


On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 9:26 AM Lionel Giard <lionel.giard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> @Marc These parking along street are indeed often not "amenity=parking" but probably more related to parking:lane tag (tagged on the highway itself). Technically it is suggested to only map these kind of roadside parking with the parking:lane tag on the street.
> But yes, it could be mapped with amenity=parking_space (without amenity=parking around it). and we could maybe use the "type=site"+"site=parking" relation to group them (as it is suggested for complex parking lot already) and allow people to understand that it is linked to the road (including the street line in the relation) and that it is roadside parking. But it is undocumented to use it that way. ^^
>
> Le mar. 5 nov. 2019 à 08:42, Marc Gemis <marc.gemis at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>> Ik map soms ook parkeerplaatsen in een straat met enkel
>> amenity=parking_space, omdat er geen parking (in de betekenis van
>> parkeerterrein) is.
>> Ik vind niet dat elke groep van een paar parkeerplaatsen in een straat
>> parkings zijn. En het wordt gerenderd, dus kan je je afvragen of de
>> wiki niet moet aangepast worden voor zulke gevallen ?
>>
>> m.