On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 12:10:41PM +0200, Mateusz Konieczny via talk wrote: > I just added some example at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access > and improved existing one. > > Review, and improving edits (or comments here) would be welcomed. > > Deliberately posting to talk to get review also from people less involved in > tagging discussions. > > Thanks to Malenki and Seventy7 for suggesting it (in 2009 and 2010 > respectively).
For me its missing at least 2 points: - The "Ground truth" we tag restrictions only when visibly assigned and verifyable. - To use access restrictions as simple and minimal as possible. From my experience access restrictions are currently the most problematic issue concerning routing. People mix in a lot of stuff like ownership, legal, physical and "emotional" aspects to tag access restrictions. This causes a lot of harm to reachability of addresses. For example the German forum fights (with me) for tagging all driveways as access=private disregarding any signs of the will of the owner. So even you dont post additional signs or putting a gate on your driveway the proposal is to tag everything access=private. I dont think thats a good idea as it makes the driveway and the area of the nuclear power plant indistinguishable. So as a delivery like Amazon Logistics, UPS, FedEx and Co you have to ignore access=privates to be able to actually use your driveway, which automatically makes them ignore the power plants service as well. This will be prone to real errors and bad workarounds. So - people try to overload the meaning of access=private with something more like ownership=private. So IMHO the advice to tag EVERY driveway with access=private is a very bad one. Flo -- Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de UTF-8 Test: The 🐈 ran after a 🐁, but the 🐁 ran away
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk