Post Reply

[Updated Page Proposal] The Parking-Lot Place Area

Post by
I have rewritten the Parking-Lot Place Area text to focus on principles and to be more appropriate for a global audience. The current text came from the US Landmark wiki and sports a number of US- and landmark-centrisms. The proposed update is here:

https://wiki.waze.com/wiki/Places#Parking_Lot
<Released 4 April 2014, original draft location removed>
<Released 23 April 2014, second draft location removed>

There are no substantive changes to policy in this text, unless one counts:
  • the explicit support of privately-operated short-term parking;
  • the explicit exclusion of stadium parking; and
  • the suggestion that certain circumstances may warrant Parking-Lot Place Areas for unnamed public parking at transit centers (driven by discussions about European parking needs and practices).
Comments very welcome. If the principles themselves come into question that would be something I don't feel qualified to arbitrate, so I hope I've captured them correctly. Everything else in this proposal flowed from the principles, so if they are not correct it would affect the whole wiki.

(EDIT: Having just realized that airport rental-car returns grandfathered from the previous Landmark document do not satisfy the foundational principles for a Parking Lot, I've updated the draft wiki to say they should be represented with Car Rental Places and not with Parking-Lot Places.)
Last edited by DwarfLord on Thu Apr 24, 2014 4:28 am, edited 3 times in total.

Post by CBenson
I guess I'm not sure yet how to handle the public garage in the urban building. In my experience in urban setting, many buildings include a garage that is leased to a company that operates the garage for profit by providing public parking. These garages are open to the public for general purposes. Although they may be filled primarily with those that work in the building or nearby and pay to be able to repeatedly park there, they are frequently also open to daily/hourly parking as well when space is available. These seem to be the type of garage that was not to be landmarked previously. However, under this proposal these would seem to qualify. One thing that has changed significantly is that multiple labels can be applied to a place. Thus, if the building is otherwise marked as a place, it is straight-forward to simply add the parking category as well if there is public garage.
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 10330
Has thanked: 646 times
Been thanked: 1844 times
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902

Post by CBenson
DwarfLord wrote:My thinking on this shifted due to Waze's explicit endorsement of landmarking private businesses.
I agree with your logic. But, if we are going to mark every urban pay parking lot as an area place, we are essentially conceding that downtown areas will be completely covered with area places. Such lots aren't reference points for navigation, they are just potential destinations.

I guess the question becomes - are we intending to mark every office building as an area place? If so, then there is certainly no reason not including parking as a category for such a place. On the other hand, if we are marking office buildings primarily as points, except when they are a particularly notable location that would be used for navigational reference such as say the Sears Tower or Rockefeller Center, then it would seem silly to mark the garage underneath as an area place.
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 10330
Has thanked: 646 times
Been thanked: 1844 times
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902

Post by AlanOfTheBerg
CBenson wrote:I agree with your logic. But, if we are going to mark every urban pay parking lot as an area place, we are essentially conceding that downtown areas will be completely covered with area places. Such lots aren't reference points for navigation, they are just potential destinations.
I don't see why every PLot needs to be an Area.
AlanOfTheBerg
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 23624
Has thanked: 610 times
Been thanked: 3685 times
Wiki Resources: Map Editing Manual | alanoftheberg@gmail.com
Oregon-based US Country Manager | iPhone6 - VZ

Post by CBenson
Then the draft needs be altered to reflect when to use an area and when to use a point, doesn't it?
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 10330
Has thanked: 646 times
Been thanked: 1844 times
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902

Post by CBenson
DwarfLord wrote:Since I don't really know how Points present I still have my Area blinders on when trying to answer this question.
Totally agree.
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 10330
Has thanked: 646 times
Been thanked: 1844 times
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902

Post by CBenson
I'm not sure which to choose without knowing the properties of the places. It does seem to me that this guidance could be essentially be applied to all places (or at least those listed as "size dependent" on the places page) not just parking lots.
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 10330
Has thanked: 646 times
Been thanked: 1844 times
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902

Post by AlanOfTheBerg
I'm cool with including this back in the main article. I would like to see the current convention as posted in other places in the wiki, especially in the current Places page, of "Area Place" and "Point Place" updated.
AlanOfTheBerg
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 23624
Has thanked: 610 times
Been thanked: 3685 times
Wiki Resources: Map Editing Manual | alanoftheberg@gmail.com
Oregon-based US Country Manager | iPhone6 - VZ

Post by AlanOfTheBerg
kentsmith9 wrote:
AlanOfTheBerg wrote:I would like to see the current convention as posted in other places in the wiki, especially in the current Places page, of "Area Place" and "Point Place" updated.
I am not sure I know what you meant here. Are you referencing following the Wiki Style Guide or something different?
No. "Area Place" and "Point Place" are already on regular use in the Places wiki page as well as the forum. It is also compact and the least grammatically confusing way to use the terms. So, I suggest not using "Place (point)" or "Place point" or other ways to reference the two types of Places.
AlanOfTheBerg
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 23624
Has thanked: 610 times
Been thanked: 3685 times
Wiki Resources: Map Editing Manual | alanoftheberg@gmail.com
Oregon-based US Country Manager | iPhone6 - VZ

Post by AlanOfTheBerg
sketch wrote:I thought that's what you meant, but I think you may have meant to say "used here" or "applied here" instead of "updated". I agree, of course.
Yes, me typing too fast and used the wrong word.
AlanOfTheBerg
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 23624
Has thanked: 610 times
Been thanked: 3685 times
Wiki Resources: Map Editing Manual | alanoftheberg@gmail.com
Oregon-based US Country Manager | iPhone6 - VZ

Post by CBenson
It seems to me that the language in the Parking Lot section of the Best map editing practice page contradicts the area/point guidance provide on the Places/Parking lot page. I have proposed eliminating the area/point guidance on that page and simply referring to the Places/Parking lot page here.
CBenson
EmeritusChamps
EmeritusChamps
Posts: 10330
Has thanked: 646 times
Been thanked: 1844 times
Regional Coordinator: Mid-Atlantic, US
Verizon, Nexus 6, Android 6.0.1, Waze 4.7.0.902