On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 08:19:04AM +0200, Harry van der Wolf wrote: > I fully understand your arguments and do agree with them. > However, in this case the park has signs at the entrance that say "private > property, no ..." and they don't allow you to enter. > So saying " Using access=private means -> broken " is over the top. > > Your earlier statement "I fight against excessive use of *=private in > Germany", I fully agree. And Germany can be replaced by almost any country > in the world. > > Mostly "destination" is the right tag, but this was already discussed way > up in this mail thread, that that was not correct in this case.
Private Property is not "access=private" - Thats for Germany "Privatweg". Its just a notification of different ownership. If there is an extension with "No thru traffic" thats destination not private. Even "No trespassing" may be interpreted as "permissive" as access is not prohibited per se but depends on your relation to other legal entities. So one needs to exactly read the signs and not make anything looking a bit privatish to access=private. Flo -- Florian Lohoff [email protected] UTF-8 Test: The 🐈 ran after a 🐁, but the 🐁 ran away -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OsmAnd" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/20200408124648.rpnwttrvp5vhvwlj%40pax.zz.de.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
