Regarding: > a driveway to a house should not be tagged access=yes > because a no trespassing sign cannot be seen. That is a complete > violation of verfiability, becuase the mapper has zero evidence that > access should be yes. *Given our defaults, no access tag is equivalent> to that.*
You're saying *omitting* a tag violates *verifiability*. That.... doesn't compute. Requiring tags to be verifiable with evidence specifically means the opposite of that. But that might get us closer to the source of disagreement. You and I interpret a *missing* access tag differently. *You read a missing access tag to mean access=yes*. (Is there documentation to support that somewhere? or... why do you think that?) I read a missing access tag to mean access=unknown, and "we don't yet have evidence of what the access restricts are" and "someone should find out and add a tag" and "until then, *use your best judgement based on context, because this is a service=driveway*". This opinion is supported by service=driveway documentation <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:service%3Ddriveway#Usage>: "There is no defined default access tag for driveways". A missing access tag surely needs to be interpreted based on context. For example, consider a military base vs a playground. An explicit access tag says "trust me, I have found evidence of this". We're discussing how to use the access tag to describe a driveway, but that's solved with service=driveway. -Alex
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
