[OSM-talk] Parking extensions: please vote
peter.miller at itoworld.com
Mon Aug 13 11:51:29 BST 2007
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 10:39:33 +0200
> From: Daniel Schmidt <Daniel at planetschmidt.de>
> Subject: [OSM-talk] Parking extensions: please vote
> To: OSM Openstreetmap <talk at openstreetmap.org>
> Message-ID: <04F6BD3E-328F-4C09-B6CC-E0A1621CF13F at planetschmidt.de>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
> please vote for my proposal on the extension of "amenity=parking".
Before we vote can we talk a bit...
Firstly, a fee may apply only on some days and only at some times. There is
a generality here with turn restrictions and vehicle prohibitions in
pedestrian areas and should be accommodated in a general 'this tag only
applies at this time/day'. Let's not get into the design of that feature
here, but it exists and we need a general solution at some time. In the mean
time I am happy with the proposed 'fee'.
Some car parks are only for certain sorts of user 'staff' or 'public'.
Should this be generalised?
Regarding car parking in buildings, the building itself may not be a car
park, but might have parking within a shopping centre. As such should it be
a building which contains a car park (using an Advanced Relationship
'contains' or what) and then the tags can clearly be assigned to the car
parking bit of the building rather than the building itself.
There is also a connected question about building and entrances; a car park
has entrances for car drivers and for pedestrians. I have been modelling the
local (large) hospital and it has some 15 entrances for use by different
people (public/staff/emergency etc) for different purposes
(wards/outpatients/maternity etc) and will no doubt be open/closed at
different times of day and on different days of the week. Currently I am
using the tag 'building=entrance' on the nodes on the outline where there is
an entrance and leaving the rest for the time being, but for a car park it
is pretty important.
Some stations have separate entrances for short term parking, pick up/drop
off, cycle parking, staff and public pedestrians.
Btw, Google/TeleAtlas Maps solves the problem by only showing the driven
routes within the local multi-storey car parks and shopping centres and
makes no mention of the pedestrian exits or the layout of the shopping
centre itself. The 'car park' between the Buttermarket and Falcon St in this
example is actually a shopping centre but the surveyor was no doubt testing
his inertial-enhanced GPS system and forgot about all that.
No answers, but lets have the raw beauty and complexity of the world in
front of us as we think about these things.
More information about the talk