On 4/15/2012 3:55 AM, 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) - 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.
On the other hand, private says "Only with permission of the owner on an
individual basis". But the owner is the homeowners association, and the
individual residents can allow people in.
In addition, the example for destination - "customer parking lots" - has
the same problems as a gated community. You (usually) can't park there
to sleep in your car or have a tailgate party.
How would you distinguish an entry for visitors from an entry for
residents only?
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
