<div dir="ltr"><span class="gmail-im" style="font-size:16px">>To me access=public would be the same as access=yes - no permission required. <div><br></div></span><div style="font-size:16px">Yes, for me too. That's not the point here. I merely said that by comparison, IMO, access=permit is more like access=public (or access=yes) than it is to access=private. If you think access=private is closer, so be it. Either way, access to the general public is available via a permit, so IMO it cannot be considered private, nor is it an unqualified "yes". We'll just have to agree to disagree.<br><br>I'm not alone in wishing this were an easier process and that a resolution would be agreed upon. Unfortunately, it might never happen because even with what I see as crystal clear reasoning provided by Kevin, it's obvious to me consensus will not be possible within the group. But should it somehow come to pass that a better tagging scenario results, I can easily replace my access=permit tags.</div><div style="font-size:16px"><br></div><div style="font-size:16px">As for whether the object also contains contact info or permit info as well, that is an option available to mappers much like the number of lanes of a highway, or its surface - it's optional and can always be added later. To make such a subsidiary tag a de facto requirement for acceptance is over shooting the mark</div><div class="gmail-yj6qo gmail-ajU" style="margin:2px 0px 0px;font-size:16px"><div id="gmail-:zj" class="gmail-ajR" tabindex="0"><img class="gmail-ajT" src="https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif" style="opacity: 0.3;"></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Warin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:61sundowner@gmail.com" target="_blank">61sundowner@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><span class="">
<div class="m_476288763202504740moz-cite-prefix">On 19-Sep-17 09:54 AM, Kevin Kenny
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 6:58 PM,
Warin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:61sundowner@gmail.com" target="_blank">61sundowner@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><span class="m_476288763202504740gmail-">
<div class="m_476288763202504740gmail-m_-9136912722454805750moz-cite-prefix">On
19-Sep-17 03:56 AM, Kevin Kenny wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">The real-life sign
says, "Access by permit only, for information
contact..." and that's what I propose to map!</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</span> Yep. <br>
I think the important thing is the contact information -
this is where the detail of what is required can be
obtained rather than having those details in OSM. <br>
It is the details that vary a lot from place to place
and maybe too varied around the world for renders to be
bothered with. It might just change from time to time,
rather not have the dynamic stuff on OSM? <br>
<br>
So access=permit with permit_contact:web/email/phone<wbr>/*=*
??? <br>
Would that be a compromise 'we' can all use? </div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>You mean, like <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/424226491" target="_blank">https://www.<wbr>openstreetmap.org/way/<wbr>424226491</a>
(and all the other parcels from that <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import:_NYCDEP_Watershed_Recreation_Areas" target="_blank">import</a>)?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It's already there. At least on everything that I've
ever tagged with *=permit. So there's zero additional work
for me in complying with your request. :)</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
My comments are not a request, but a suggestion. Hence the question
marks.<br>
<br>
I don't think the tagging on <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/424226491" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/<wbr>way/424226491</a>
goes far enough. <br>
There is no specific contact information for a permit. <br>
Not all permits come from the land owners/controllers some come from
another body e.g. Kokoda Track. <br>
</div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Tagging mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Tagging@openstreetmap.org">Tagging@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.<wbr>org/listinfo/tagging</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Dave Swarthout<br>Homer, Alaska<br>Chiang Mai, Thailand<br>Travel Blog at <a href="http://dswarthout.blogspot.com" target="_blank">http://dswarthout.blogspot.com</a></div></div>
</div>