[Tagging] Who has the last word over the access tag?
clifford at snowandsnow.us
Sun Apr 25 21:01:42 UTC 2021
I think something must be missing from your fable since all the answers
come back to the logical conclusion that the access=private isn't valid.
We've had some of the very wealthy attempt to add private signs to prevent
people from heading to the beach on public lands. The law sided with the
people. But this doesn't fit your fable. Clearly the law wasn't created by
a bunch of criminals.
My other thought is this fable similar to land stolen from indigenous
people. In these cases, I'd be much more cautious. Certainly the OSM on the
ground rule would indicate that the access is public, but I'd probably side
with the indigenous people. I have agreed to the removal of highway=path on
historically owned and culturally significant to Native Americans. (Note
the path was in the process of being returned to its native state.)
My request to you is to add another chapter to your fable giving us more
On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 4:53 AM Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> this is a fable built on a real-world case. Please don't guess what the
> real-world case behind this is; it doesn't matter. Do me a favour and
> discuss the fable.
> Let's assume you buy a large plot of land and a nice holiday home
> somewhere on a pacific island. You travel there regularly and enjoy the
> beautiful landscaped garden. You put up "Private property - no
> trespassing" signs and hire a couple of guards to ensure nobody enters
> your property. Consequently the paths in your garden are mapped in OSM
> as access=private.
> One day while you are in your home country there is a coup on the
> pacific island, and the self-proclaimed island government nullifies all
> foreign land ownership. Your guards go home and someone pulls out the
> "No trespassing" signs. Random people start enjoying your garden and the
> local police are watching.
> Let's say this goes on for half a year. The island government has no
> international backing but they control the island de-facto. You say that
> the property is still your property no matter what the criminals of the
> island government say. You take out a one-page ad in the island
> newspaper saying that the decrees of the island government are null and
> void and that you will sue anyone who enters your property.
> Still, every day people are walking across your property and the police
> are waving happily.
> Are the paths in your garden still access=private?
> Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging