Zählen Parkplätze von Geschäften zu normalen "Parkplätzen"?

access=permissive ist im Allgemeinen nicht korrekt: Ein Kundenparkplatz ist normalerweise gerade nicht "open to general traffic" (wie in der Definition von permissive gefordert), sondern darf nur von Kunden genutzt werden.

Einfach amenity=parking + access=customer verwenden. Das Tag ist zwar neu, aber alle vorhandenen passen einfach nicht wirklich auf diese Situation.

Why can't you simply do a -1 to comments?

I disagree with @Tordanik and agree with the initial answer. access=permissive is exactly what everyone was told to use for a pub parking when I joined OSM in 2007. Please stop endlessly redefining tags.

@cartinus: It is true there is some discussion about the access=customer tagging, but access=permissive is definitely wrong, as explained by Tordanik. The alternatives usually proposed for access=customer are access=destination or access=customers; see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/customer and its talk page.

Also note that access=customers (note the 's') is recommended, not access=customer. It's also used much more frequently in OSM.

And I reiterate: access=permissive is and has been the right way for years.

Then five people on a mailinglist or in a wiki proposal page "decide" differently. That is the best way to make tags in OSM useless. Please stop catering to such nonsense.

access=destination on a parking lot is just stupid. The parking lot is always the destination, when you park a car there, so that tag adds absolutely nothing.