[Talk-us] Marking closed bridges

[Anthony]

On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Matthias Julius <lists at julius-net.net>wrote:

> Richard Welty <rwelty at averillpark.net> writes:
> > and now that i've seen it, the mapnik rendering is not distinguishable
> > from access=private
> >
> > on the other hand, we don't tag to get a specific rendering effect from
> > an existing renderer.
>
> Exactly!  Don't tag for the renderer!
>

In this case, I'd say the renderer is right.  Both access=private and
access=no mean essentially the same thing - you aren't allowed there without
explicit approval.  In the case of access=no, that approval happens to come
from a government agency, but I see no reason that needs to be drawn
differently.


> > maybe an additional term on access ("access=closed"), so that some
> > future renderer will be
> > able to distinguish the different reasons for restricted access.
>
> If the public does not have access at all then access=no is the
> appropriate tag, IMO.
>

+1
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/attachments/20091204/817f4b5e/attachment.html>