On 06.10.2015 23:11, John Willis wrote: > > >> On Oct 6, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Friedrich Volkmann <b...@volki.at> wrote: >> >> So if "destination" excludes off-wanderers and sightseers, what tag do you >> use when you need to include them? > > Yes/permissive under general. > > If I am free to come up park my car for any reason and wander about, that is > pretty damn permissive.
Permissive would also mean that we are allowed to drive thru, at least according to the tag definition in the Wiki. We need to stick to those definitions, there's too much data based on them. > I may be wrong, but the signage you are describing is very interesting to me > because in general it doesn't exist in the US. Usually private residential > streets (not driveways) are still access=yes/permissive unless there is a > gate (I lived adjacent to one w/o a gate), and parking on busy streets/ > neighborhoods is done with permits - but the road itself is permissive. Indeed there are huge differences between our countries. When searching for translations of legal terms, I stumbled upon pages like http://blog.al.com/breaking/2011/12/no_through_traffic_signs_in_ne.html. This case would be unthinkable here in Central Europe. All fields of life are excessively regulated. There are laws and road signs for everything. There are all kinds of restrictions on public roads as well as on privately owned roads. Authorities are imaginative not only at complicating rules, but also when it comes to fining people. In the given example, they would put up a proper traffic sign, and police would punish every driver who ignores it. > If there is some sign that says "residents and people with business with > residents only" - that sounds an awful lot like access=destination. Well, it may sound like it, but it's really different from the other kind of destination traffic. Let's take this example: http://map.project-osrm.org/?z=14¢er=47.801914%2C16.184020&loc=47.788565%2C16.178441&loc=47.805574%2C16.160095&hl=en Assume we want to go fishing at the brook (Johannesbach). We probably need to pay for it. In that case, we are in business with the owners, so we are allowed to drive directly to the fishing spot. But if fishing is free, or if we just want to hike along the brook, we are not allowed to drive in. We need to walk 2,35 km to reach the brook. Or we drive 8 km all around the forest (as the routing engine suggests) and still have 1 km to walk to reach the brook. In any case, we lose a lot of time, and we'll be physically exhausted. But if the traffic sign said "except for local traffic" or "except for destinations in the wood", we could legally drive directly to the fishing spot, no matter what we are doing there. -- Friedrich K. Volkmann http://www.volki.at/ Adr.: Davidgasse 76-80/14/10, 1100 Wien, Austria _______________________________________________ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
