[Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

John Willis johnw at mac.com
Tue Apr 7 10:41:08 UTC 2015

> On Apr 7, 2015, at 6:56 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2015-04-03 11:08 GMT+02:00 Bryce Nesbitt <bryce2 at obviously.com>:
>>> At most they will be access=permissive. Public implies an inalienable right of access supported by law.
>> Permissive implies something far different to me.  It means that I can walk onto the property without prior arrangement, and chances are nobody will hassle me.
> +1
> a camp could be "access=permissive" (trespassing tolerated) or access="private" / access=customers where private and customers seem similar.
> access=yes /public (a right for everyone to access) is not a situation I have ever encountered on a camp site, but it might eventually exist.

Any camp that doesn't allow any access, even hikers/bikers without paying a fee is access=customers, right? Even if it is a "public" park?

if you can access the camp without a car (like a lot of state parks) for just daytime access for free and then fee=yes on the parking... And some camping:fee= or something to show that camping there is for a fee, but independent of actual access to the grounds? 

A lot of govt operated campgrounds 
Do feel like access=public, as you can show up there and expect access during business hours of the camp (like a library) - but *using the camping specific amenities* requires a permit/fee - but is still open to the general public (like a public park or public parking, which are also subject to regulation & fees, now that I think about it, like parking meters and time limits). 

Permissive would have to be on any privately owned camps that open to the general public right?

Or am I misunderstanding the access=key?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20150407/9102c13c/attachment.html>

More information about the Tagging mailing list