Create Example Clarity Around User Classes versus Vehicle Types for Disabled Placard Requirements

[mschwartzie]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

Under User Classes (https://github.com/openmobilityfoundation/curb-data-specification/tree/main/curbs#user-classes), the example given describes a much less common implementation around a vehicle type requirement that the vehicle type is handicap-accessible rather than the use case where a person requires a disabled parking placard.

Describe the solution you'd like

Recommend describing the much more common implementation where you describe Purpose as disabled-parking-permit

Is this a breaking change

• No, not breaking

Impacted Spec

For which spec is this feature being requested?

• Curbs

[schnuerle]

Thanks @mschwartzie what SMART city or cities are you submitting this for?

[mschwartzie]

@schnuerle SFMTA

[schnuerle]

Could be part of the work on #143 if we can get a PR for both issues for the patch release.

[mplsmitch]

Here's how the EU is proposing to handle this: https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1139

[schnuerle]

@mplsmitch can you make a new PR for this that includes the new well known value of disabled-parking-permit? And include what is recommended in #143 in the same PR.

[schnuerle]

Closed with #160 for the 1.0.1 patch.