[Tagging] Examples at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access

[Mateusz Konieczny]

May 26, 2020, 08:28 by arne at thaw.de:

> Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging <tagging at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>> May 25, 2020, 02:45 by arne at thaw.de:
>>
>>>
>>> [access=private driveways implicitly permitting delivieries to destination?]
>>>
>>> Not all deliveries are actively requested, and the delivery person can't know if you requested it or not.
>>>
>>
>> Good point. Maybe it can be argued that there is implicit permission for delivery services?
>> My uncle has farm, with clearly private yard (it is unsigned).
>>
>> Postman or package delivery would be welcomed there and - even if package 
>> would not be requested, but random person driving to
>> front of his house would not be and AFAIK would violate law.
>>
>
> I think what you're describing is access=destination, not =private.
>

Why? "access=destination" means "no transit traffic, no other restrictions".
What changes nothing for a typical driveway.


>> [...]
>>
>>> FWIW, I'm less happy with the current state of the access=private page. But I'm not sure if consensus exists to clarify it.
>>>
>> What is wrong and how you want to change it?
>>
>
> It does not specifiy precisely what the tag value =private means. It also doesn't make a clear enough distinction between private ownership and private access (by using the term "private" colloqiually and by showing a picture of what looks like an ownership=private situation).
>
Changed a bit in
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:access%3Dprivate&diff=1995183&oldid=1986562

> I think the =private wiki page could be improved by clarifying that =private really does require _explicit_ prior permission. The "Facilities" section already mentions "a closed group of users", which implies just that, but evidently this isn't very clear.
>
I added "Permission may be implicit, for example delivering a package into a house."
on Key:Access and Tag:access=private pages, as it appears to match the actual usage.

> Additionally, the language generally could use a bit of cleanup, the relation to alternatives like =destination should be mentioned
>
destination mentioned

> (I might take a swing at this if I find the time.)
>
Yeah, fully resolving this (not just parts that I quoted) will take plenty of time.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/attachments/20200526/a32a937d/attachment.htm>