Am Mi., 15. Juli 2020 um 01:40 Uhr schrieb Paul Allen <pla16...@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, 14 Jul 2020 at 23:44, Matthew Woehlke <mwoehlke.fl...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > The multipolygon is just ammenity=parking, but the sub-objects are >> tagged with more information (capacity, in particular). Again, is that >> sane, or do I need to do this differently? >> > > Doesn't look sane at present. You have combined one public parking area > with two private ones. If they're all private, for use by the restaurant, > mark > them all as private. > if they are for the clients of the restaurant, the typical tagging is access=customers Also you should not have 2 objects amenity=parking which cover the same area (regardless of additional tags). > > Even so, is a multipolygon giving any information that couldn't be had > by separate parking areas with the appropriate operator tag? > +1, this is what I would choose, no relation at all. It is also what you can probably argue for "on the ground": two parkings operated by the same business, not one parking spread over 2 areas. > > (BTW, is there any accepted way to tag a 'carry-out only' space?) >> > > If you're talking about one (or both) of those parking areas by the > restaurant, then it is (or they are) not really a parking area. I'd > probably make it a closed way with highway=service + area=yes > and then risk the wrath of purists by naming it "Pick-up Zone". > there is the "maxstay" tag which can be used with a value like 5 or 15 minutes. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/maxstay#values Cheers Martin
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
