[Tagging] Fwd: Missing access value (access=license / authorization?)
graemefitz1 at gmail.com
Sun Aug 12 21:30:22 UTC 2018
On 13 August 2018 at 06:50, Kevin Kenny <kevin.b.kenny+osm at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 9:48 AM Szem <szembiketeam at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I begun to use the "permit" tag, what is the correct tagging for these
> > - Roads found in Waterworks area (You could get permit only for biking
> and walking, no cars except for their own ones)
> > access=private, motor_vehicle / vehicle = private ? bicycle=permit,
> foot=permit, horse=no
> Sounds right; no need to tag motor_vehicle separately, since 'access'
> covers all transportation modes that aren't called out separately.
> > - Roads on the embankments (By any motor vehicle without permission is
> forbidden, except for their own ones, other access is free)
> > access= private, motor_vehicle / vehicle =permit ? foot=yes, horse=yes,
> If permission is readily obtainable, then 'permit'. If permission
> happens on a case-by-case basis, 'private' is probably closer.
In cases when only official vehicles (National Parks, Water supply etc) are
allowed, I've always called that vehicles=no, working on " *no* – No access
for the general public."?
> - Roads managed by Hunting Association, wildlife conservation areas
> (Crossing by any vehicle without permission is forbidden, except for their
> own ones):
> > access= private, motor_vehicle / vehicle = permit, foot=yes,
> horse=permit, bicycle= permit
> Once again, if it's "access granted if you comply with the
> formalities", then 'permit', otherwise 'private'. The Hunting
> Association one sounds as if it restricts access to its own members?
> In that case, it's definitely "private."
& yes, I'd agree that Members only is "private"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging