[Talk-GB] Front paths

Jon Pennycook jon.pennycook at gmail.com
Tue Dec 29 21:19:52 UTC 2020


Access=delivery seems better.
Definitely not access=yes ("The public has an official, legally-enshrined
right of access; i.e., it's a right of way.")

Don't forget Special Forces. If you look carefully at the traffic
restriction orders issued by councils, they often (maybe always?) exclude
members of the Special Forces. They probably also have access to my path.

I really think we should just extend the meaning of "private" to include
implied access for deliveries, military, and emergency.  We could then
leave access=delivery for ways that are only used for deliveries, eg for
shops or factories.

Anything else implies that the general public could use my path to reach
one of my neighbours, which is not something I have allowed them to do. I
tend to take "destination" to mean that you could get away with using the
way as a through route - the wiki says "i.e., local traffic only" (local
traffic isn't welcome on my driveway or path!)


Jon

On Tue, 29 Dec 2020, 20:36 Martin Wynne, <martin at 85a.uk> wrote:

> On 29/12/2020 19:22, Jez Nicholson wrote:
>  > The whole access= is indeed interesting.
>
> As far as I can see there are only 2 possible values:
>
> access=yes
>
> access=destination
>
> Even where a road has a big Private, Keep Out, No Visitors sign, it
> would rarely exclude the postman or an Amazon delivery van.
>
> Or a doctor or an ambulance or a fire engine. Not to mention the police.
>
> Or an Ordnance Survey surveyor?
>
> Do we have an access=tradesmans_entrance option?
>
> Martin.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-GB mailing list
> Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/attachments/20201229/44f9eee5/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Talk-GB mailing list