<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2016-11-16 2:04 GMT+01:00 Nelson A. de
Oliveira <span dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:naoliv@gmail.com" target="_blank"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:naoliv@gmail.com">naoliv@gmail.com</a></a>></span>:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div id="gmail-m_-2774685117697793638gmail-:43d"
class="gmail-m_-2774685117697793638gmail-a3s
gmail-m_-2774685117697793638gmail-aXjCH
gmail-m_-2774685117697793638gmail-m1586aab527a23c95">Since
they can't find another tag to indicate those "dangerous"<br>
places, they argue that access=destination is valid for
this case.<br>
<br>
Other group (including me) find that this is wrong: we
should not tag<br>
streets considered dangerous in OSM (specially when
"dangerous" is<br>
subjective).<br>
We also think that access=destination is being wrongly
used for this.<br>
<br>
Since we can't reach a consensus on this, we would like to
hear some<br>
opinions and suggestions on how to handle such problem,
please.</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
The "danger" you're talking about is otherwise called a
"hazard".<br>
I have mentioned several times that a <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/hazard"
title="Proposed features/hazard">Proposed features/<span
class="searchmatch">hazard</span></a> exists that, IMHO, is
very well done. But OSM doesn't seem to care about hazards,
especially children related, except you and I and a few.<br>
That page needs some care, but, as things go, it can be removed
in secret any time like <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations/Proposed/Defaults"
title="Relations/Proposed/Defaults">Relations/Proposed/<span
class="searchmatch">Defaults</span></a> which, maybe not
in that form, is badly needed because it would put default
values inside the OSM database instead of scattered everywhere.<br>
One should not remove a badly needed proposition, but mark it
"don't use", "unsuitable', "to be reworked" ...<br>
I would have liked to tackle the job but I've had too many
disappointments from the answers on these lists and my time is
used by other hobbies.<br>
<br>
As to "access=destination", previous answers said alright that
danger is not a legal matter.<br>
I personally don't think of that as legality but as instructions
for routing, whether and how a GPS can use that road.<br>
access=* shouldn't be mixed with other considerations like it
was done with access=dedicated.<br>
Only the length of the discussions it has generated is a proof
of that. Normal access=* rules are very clear cut. But on the
wiki, you can read that access=dedicated is meaningless in
Belgium and on Belgian pages, the instructions are to use it.
Go figure.<br>
<br>
So, go and finalize <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/hazard"
title="Proposed features/hazard">Proposed features/<span
class="searchmatch">hazard</span></a>, making sure they
include what you think of.<br>
<br>
Cheers
<br>
<br>
<table>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>André.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>