<div dir="auto">Ok, Warin<div dir="auto">My suggestion was only a last resorce if "access=permit" loses the vote process again. I understand a permit is not a fee, is "some kind of paperwork done in advance"</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">- José Moya</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">El 24/9/2017 3:37, "Warin" <<a href="mailto:61sundowner@gmail.com">61sundowner@gmail.com</a>> escribió:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div class="quoted-text">
<div class="m_-7381030626473641020moz-cite-prefix">On 21-Sep-17 04:01 PM, José G Moya Y.
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="auto">Hi
<div dir="auto">I agree with the permit system as it is discused
here. I found it useful for National Parks, specially for
World Heritage Biosphere Reservations, where a small amount
of people has to book in advance.
<div dir="auto">If it keeps getting a strong opposition, you
could consider mapping as access=fee and adding a "book" tag
somewhere in the fee system, such as fee=book, to make users
know the access needs booking in advance.</div>
<div dir="auto">But I prefer access=permit.</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
'fee' is an already established key. Don't change its use. fee=book
makes no sense considering the present use of 'fee'. <br>
access is not used to signify fee. Don't change that.<br>
<br>
access=permit Yes<br>
operator=* ... no - the permit organisation may not be 'operator'. I
much prefer the permit:*=* system as that does signify that it is
strictly related to the permit. <br>
If a fee is required then permit:fee=* might be suitable ... similar
to the contact details permit:phone/website/email=* ?<br>
<br>
<br>
Definitions??? Something like? <br>
A permit is a formal process required to gain access, typically
resulting in a issue of a paper form. <br>
It is not the membership of an organisation (e.g. sporting culb). <br><div class="elided-text">
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">El 21/9/2017 4:48, "Warin" <<a href="mailto:61sundowner@gmail.com" target="_blank">61sundowner@gmail.com</a>>
escribió:<br type="attribution">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="m_-7381030626473641020m_-1930067318839872669moz-cite-prefix">On
21-Sep-17 11:24 AM, Dave Swarthout wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">I am in total agreement with the proposal
as it's been developed in this thread.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I too am unfamiliar with structuring the voting
process but it may be enough to simply add a new
section "Voting" at the end of the page, copying
some boiler-plate from some other proposal, and
advertising on this list. The voting, just like any
discussion we engage in on these mailing lists, is
open to debate and the result is AFAIK non-binding.
People can do as they wish afterward.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
NO. The formal process is to;<br>
1) create a proposal page - <br>
2) then call for comments as a new subject here on this
list. <br>
3) After at least 2 weeks consider any comments made,
modify the proposal and if that looks good<br>
4) then call for votes as a new subject here on this list.<br>
5) after another 2 weeks and some number of votes consider
if it passes<br>
<br>
OR<br>
You can simply use the tag. There are some 235 uses from
taginfo now, so it has been used. <br>
As there are few of these tags around then it should be
documented - create a new wiki page. <br>
235 is not large but it does establish a use.<br>
<br>
Taginfo also has use of 'permit' .. no explanation of what
these are for and the numbers are small. <br>
<br>
Comment - there are a few that use it for car parks in the
US. But no information on where to obtain a permit. <br>
I do think that the permit contact details need to be
available, and this should be suggested a a
'recommendation'? on the wiki page. <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Many thanks to Kevin for the work you've done on
this tag.</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 5:39
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"><span>On
21-Sep-17 06:01 AM, marc marc wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Le 20. 09. 17 à
20:39, Kevin Kenny a écrit :<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Is this a
minimal proposal that we can all tolerate?<br>
</blockquote>
I do not see any difference between
access=permit and (not tag for)<br>
access to a sports club : you can go there if
you meet certain<br>
conditions and generally any sports club
allows you to "buy a permit<br>
according to their formality"<br>
I see no difference with private property
either. if you "follow"<br>
my formalities, you will have the right to
come at home.<br>
I think that it would be preferable to improve
access=private<br>
by adding a tag to describe any means of
"overriding" this restriction<br>
rather than inventing a new type of access
that is between sports clubs<br>
are public for the moment), access=private and
paying infrastructure<br>
like tool roads.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span> The primary difference between
access=private and access=permit<br>
is that a formal permit system exists that anyone
can easily use.<br>
Some permits are easy and free,<br>
some you and I cannot get (unless you are the
right tribe or have strong cultural connections).<br>
<br>
Examples;<br>
The Kokoda Trail is not 'owned' by the permit
authority.<br>
Here the Trail goes through many villages and is
administered by a government appointed body.<br>
The practice here is to get a permit from the
authority and not bother with the property owners.<br>
Typically normal people will use a guided 'tour'
and that organisation will be registered with the
authority and get the individual permits.<br>
<br>
The Woomera Prohibited Areas (e.g. way 436098551)
again are not 'owned' by the authority.<br>
These areas have both the rocket range and
property owners.<br>
The range operators have provided the property
owners with shelters -<br>
most of the property owners use the shelters as
cool places to shelter from the heat (as well as
rockets).<br>
Here I would hope that people wanting access would
negotiate with both the permit system and the
private property owner.<br>
The permit system ensures that travellers are not
present when the rockets are being fired.<br>
<br>
------------------------<br>
There is enough difference that it should be
tagged together with the way that permits can be
obtained.
<div class="m_-7381030626473641020m_-1930067318839872669HOEnZb">
<div class="m_-7381030626473641020m_-1930067318839872669h5">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</div></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></div>