[OSM-talk] Private roads
socks-openstreetmap.org at earth.li
Thu Jul 12 13:31:05 BST 2007
On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 12:37:23PM +0100, Tom Chance wrote:
> I think in those instances we should tag the roads with something else like
> Let's keep "access=private" meaning "the public can't access this
Legally, or physically?
Actually, that's more a question for the bike= variation on the
access= key. (Again in the UK,) The rights and prohibitions for
cycling are a grey area legally, and I've seen lots of bike=no tags
in OSM on footpaths where in reality there's not a "No Cycling"
sign, and therefore cycling is probably allowed. But equally, I've
mapped some footpaths that it would be pretty impossible to get a
bike down, but not put a bike=no tag because I assumed that's a
legal No, not a physical No. However perhaps knowing the physical
situation would be more helpful to end users of the data?
> Un-adopted roads can be rendered like any other road for standard maps.
> Private access ways need to be rendered (for reasons already discussed) but
> they also need to be clearly labelled as private, otherwise we might get in
> trouble with the owners and people who get lost :-)
A red edge to the rendering, perhaps?
More information about the talk