First, as they are public (not private) streets, anybody has the right to traverse them. Yes, a local ordinance might (in the near future) prohibit access for "cut-through," it is the right of the municipality to pass such an ordinance and for local police to enforce it. "We don't want the mappers to put these data into their maps and navigation apps" simply isn't going to happen, as we (mappers) are not going to be "muzzled:" these are real data in the real world. Censorship is not the answer, rather it is proper tagging which feeds routing algorithms.
I might suggest a solution OSM might consider can be to tag access=destination and/or residential=living_street. There might also be a note tag briefly explaining the local ordinance which gives rise to such a local preponderance of access tags. But the streets should not "be deleted" as the mayor and residents wish. With the right tags, the apps' routing algorithms won't include these streets, and the problem (as it is perceived as coming from "navigation apps") is effectively solved. SteveA California _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
