Missing "private" parking and problematic "not applicable" label

[kayD]

The "not applicable" label in the legend is problematic:

https://zlant.github.io/parking-lanes/#18/49.85138/9.96014

The two issues are:

• The "Niederhoferstraße" north side is tagged as parking:left=no -- unclear what "not applicable" in the legend should mean to the user of the map.
  • "no parking" is a different color.
  • If it should indicate a tagging error (i.e. insufficient data), then it would better be stated "tagging problem" or "unclear data" in the legend.
  • I believe that "unsupported condition" is referring to possibly correct tagging, and that condition rendering will be implemented later? (what else is misssing?)
• The parking area right adjacent to the legend is tagged as access=private -- it is a company parking lot, even with a fence and gate around the property.
  • "private" is a missing condition in the legend, or
  • "no parking" would also be an option (but not really clear).
  • "not applicable" seems to be wrong, as the tagging seems to be complete enough.

[zlant]

1. "Not applicable" is bad label. I'll rename it to "Unusable"
2. I'll change to "No parking/private"

[kayD]

Please excuse my ignorance, but I don't understand "Unusable":

• As a user of the parking map (i.e. when I would look on the map before driving to my destination), does "unusable" mean I cannot use this parking place for parking?
• As an osm mapper, does it mean the parking map cannot use the tagging I provided?
  • If that is the case, what is the difference to "unsupported condition"?

I thought that the main use case for the map would be the first (people in need of parking space advice). If this is the case, then mapping problems should be visible (as "cannot tell"/"error"), but should not probably not be the most pronounced display.

[tordans]

@zlant I am a bit confused about the code. I thing this might be a mixup from the v1 vs. v2 schema. In the current version (v2-code path) does not use the :condition schema anymore

Former… parking:condition=* tagging was deprecated and should no longer be used.

(Source)

… however the code uses the term condition extensively. The tooltip also still talks about :condition based on the hard coded https://github.com/zlant/parking-lanes/blob/master/src/parking/controls/Legend.tsx#L37

However, the tags for the road at https://zlant.github.io/parking-lanes/#18/49.85089/9.95935 are a simple parking:left=no.

---

I think the code for the current (v2) schema actually looks at the physical "parking position" (not the legal aspect) which is defined in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Street_parking#Parking_position as as simple

There is no parking. This refers only to the physical presence of a parking lanes, not the legal condition.

Therefore, the label could be "No parking (unspecified)" indicating that there the legal reason why there is no parking (which would be described by tags like access, fee, restriction… (Wiki)) is not specified.

This label would still make it hard to separate it from the value =no_parking which also says "No parking" but referring to the legal aspect.

Maybe "No parking (no infrastructure)" is better to clarify the reason for the "no".