On Sunday, April 15, 2012, Alan Mintz wrote: > At 2012-04-14 22:10, Nathan Edgars II wrote: > >> In the U.S., a gated residential community usually allows anyone in who >> has a legitimate reason to be there (e.g. visiting a friend, delivering a >> package, repairing a TV). It seems that this fits access=destination as >> well as private. Would it be reasonable to tag it as such, and leave >> access=private for secondary entrances that lack a guard and can only be >> opened by residents? >> > > access=destination says nothing about a legitimate reason to be there > according to the wiki > (http://wiki.openstreetmap.**org/wiki/Access<http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access>) > - just that it's your destination. For example, you might want to go to a > park within such a community to walk your dog, which would seem to be > allowed by access=destination on the gate node, roads, or parking, but that > would be incorrect unless you are, or are the guest of, a resident. > > I tag everything within such gated communities as access=private. > > +1
Everywhere private has a class of people who are legitimately allowed there. The point about destination is that anyone is allowed but only if they are going to that place (typically the restriction is to stop rat running). There's also access=permissive, where a location is private (not a right) but the owner gives blanket permission for anyone to access. That doesn't sem to be the case here. David
_______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
