[OSM-talk-be] Usage of "access=designated" in Belgium

[Ben Laenen]

On Friday 22 August 2008, Lennard wrote:
> Ben Laenen wrote:
> > In short, I haven't found any reason why one would use the
> > designated tag in Belgium. I just can't find a situation where a
> > different tag is needed than just "yes". So I'm wondering if other
> > people know of any
>
> I've used access=destination on numerous occasions, but that's
> probably not what you had in mind when you wrote that.

Of course, there's still access=destination which has to be used a lot 
in Belgium, but since you bring it up, this "uitgezonderd plaatselijk 
verkeer" exception doesn't apply to horse riders, cyclists or 
pedestrians (even though they don't seem to realize that in various 
places where I've seen the no access sign with both "uitgezonderd 
plaatselijk verkeer" and the except bicycles sign...), so that's also 
something we need to write down somewhere.

And now that we're talking about access rules :-) ... In the past I've 
sometimes used access=no where traffic isn't allowed, but pedestrians 
are, but I didn't use a foot=yes tag. Now, should we also have some 
implicit rule that access=no doesn't apply to pedestrians similarly 
like the access=destination tag above, or do we prefer explicit 
foot=yes in these cases? Did other people have the habit of forgetting 
to add foot=yes as well? I guess it's better to have explicit foot=yes, 
since I think people will forget foot=no more often when access is 
really not allowed.

Ben